I guess my post was ignored, but indeed support is back to where it was before as I said.

Yes? It's a combination of giving those miners who want to signal the option to do so, and as a way to represent the remainder that have no opinion on the matter. Basically I'm saying a pool should either give miners a choice, or have a position.

Pools are the miners' voice and the miners are the only ones who can reliably activate substantial change. People want to either choose a pool based on what it's signalling or want the pool they're already loyal to to give them the option of signalling what they want. The fact that there are lots of miners that choose pools only due to profit doesn't change the fact that pools are the ones with the actual power to effect change. Pools should be proactive and ahead of what is happening in the bitcoin development space even if the miners are less inclined to be so.

Lack of more concrete messages from the pools is the reason garbage like User Activated Soft Fork and much worse, change of PoW are being bantered around. I understand there is potentially conflict since you're representing bitmain who have a (very unpopular) position of sorts, but you have said you're an independent entity.

As much as I'd like for this to be true, I'm afraid your celebrating is premature. The same pools are voting for BU that were previously in the last 24 hours; it's just that those particular pools have had an unlucky 24 hour streak. This is just normal variance and within 72 hours no doubt the percentage will return to what it was before.

Which means you're focused on running a profit business as much as possible and attempting to dissociate mining from the bitcoin network at large. I'm sorry but currently mining voting is the crucial thing lacking, preventing bitcoin from moving forward and I think your position is unacceptable given lack of miner support is what's preventing successful bitcoin evolution. You cannot pretend mining is dissociated from bitcoin development as much as they can't pretend mining is dissociated from bitcoin development. At this point in time I'd call it negligent for a pool to not at least have a position with respect to segwit, core, and unlimited, even if that position is 'we don't want change.' If that's what you really want then at least make it clear.

You've installed silicon drivers and as you see in the message you should have installed a winusb driver instead, and read the readme instead of guessing.

I recall a 90BTC fee by mistake a few years ago... they did eventually get their 90btc back.

We went on the warpath around that time and made lots of noise about the Chinese pools producing so many empty blocks. F2pool were the first to respond who made big inroads in making it happen far less frequently - they then handed off their technique to the other Chinese pools who followed suit, since f2pool more or less were the first to implement header mining and gave it to the others. Antpool being the worst offender back then doesn't surprise me - their pool admins are morons. I don't think that was related to asicboost either, just plain stupidity vs malice Hanlon's razor style.

Thanks. What I'm referring to is any pool producing blocks with rolling version numbers.

Because I build the binaries for linux and windows myself, but not Mac.

The number of empty blocks by antpool and the timing of those blocks found in relation to the previous blocks is consistent with SPV/SPY header only mining that almost every Chinese pool does (and I'm against.) In light of that, it's hard to believe that antpool only were using covert asicboost mining to their advantage unless every single Chinese pool was also doing it (but the timing again is consistent with quick blocks built on headers.) At this stage in my opinion I'd have to say they haven't been using it. Additionally looking at whatever code they have released in the past suggests they barely know what they're doing most of the time in software so while they know hardware, for some reason they're hopeless with software, rushing anything that 'just works' and not caring beyond that. I've never seen overt asicboost working anywhere and the evidence isn't there for covert.
In the first release of their branded fork of my software they called bmminer for the S9 miner they had an extra field in their stratum subscribe message which I suspect was a planned deployment of asicboost but that then went away in their next firmware onwards.

Last I checked, this was the BITCOINtalk forum and you're in the BITCOIN mining section, so no, not sha256, but BITCOIN ONLY.

I just checked the diff at the time I first joined bitcointalk and started mining and it was 555k. ~1 million times less than it is today. My first miner was a 220MH GPU. I was earning about 40x what an avalon7 earns today with that hashrate.

Actually you're right, I recall the diff being even lower but btc was $30 at the time. It went down while I was mining. I think diff was around 600k when I first started mining (June 2011).

Well if we're going to compare... I can remember 50BTC blocks, $3 BTC and 30 million diff. 

You are confusing massive wins on the lottery with a solo block and are mixing in all miner types in your thinking. Yes there are people with a single low hashrate mining device on this pool and they have to be extremely lucky to find a block - and they do occasionally. However the bulk of the blocks lately are being found by much larger miners, at least 100TH, and often they've spent more money on their mining investment, or spent more on renting hashrate, than the amount they have been rewarded. They're not really winning the lottery with their block finds; the margins are much smaller since they invested much more (and renting overall for long enough is a guaranteed loss.)

And thanks again madmartyk. Almost all the early block finders and about half the late block finders gave me a tip after finding a block, so it has been getting less and less common of late. This service cannot possibly attract enough hashrate to make much more than it costs to run the servers and most people have acknowledged that and appreciated that it provides a service beyond its fee and tipping was routine in the past. The tips helped fund further development and while no one is obliged to do it, I greatly appreciated it and it helped keep this service alive and well and kept me enthusiastic about continuing to run it. I could have raised the fee further but I acknowledge this is a no-frills service so that would be unrealistic and I quite liked the community aspect to this pool even if it doesn't earn me much (and costs me in code and maintenance time).

Enough people saying the same thing over just to increase their post count, there's nothing more worth saying on this topic and the OP hasn't even responded after his initial post so I'm locking the thread.

Lol, best asicboost post yet

Are you even listening? Current miners will hash exactly the same way they always have. If bitmain are doing something secretive with their special sauce then segwit will block it and make them only usable in the same way the rest of the public is using them.