I'm pretty sure you're free to code your own miner, right?  Then any and all specifications you have in mind could be met...  Yes, as a software developer, I am very sketched about boxed software as opposed to open source.  You can't pop the hood and verify that it is only doing what it says it is... (Guess you could sniff out all your network activity?) But the problem is how to compensate the developer for both the time and effort they have invested.   Paying it forward  didn't really work for  reaperprime, did it?  Someone made out w  like 75 BTC and dropped development.  At least w developer fees, with the developers interests tied to yours you will continued to receive updates to the miner...  And you can't argue with the results although ypool leaves a bit to be desired...  

I think the code transparency issue of a non open source solo miner wouldn't sit too well in my head though, one of the reasons I skipped out on primeGPU...

Perhaps, there might be a slight possibility that you should learn something about the technology that you're using then?

So, you have any luck with this distro?  Can't seem to find any feedback anywhere related to it.

After the recent attention in the media in the last few months, I would expect definitely a more widespread acceptance of bitcoin in the year of 2014.  It doesn't even matter if another crypto-currency wins out in the end, bitcoin will be more widely accepted first because it was the first of its kind to grab the attention it grasped so, and will in the future.

Hmm... sounds like someone's sour that they missed the boat...

I'm actually getting bored listening to people make statements like these... 'It's the end!' or 'The bubble has burst!", if only I had a Satoshi for every time this type of myopic vision is projected...  Even Bank of America is acknowledging the potential of bitcoin...

This is sort of unrelated, but do you believe in the single bullet theory also? ;-)

This article seems to be the result of poor journalism.  How is it that those whose chosen role in life is to provide information to the public don't do the proper research and misrepresent what is really going.  Yes, the writer probably used a poor translation of an article from Germany, but hey, it's the LA TIMES, if you can't get it right, you shouldn't print it... the writer should have done a little research before printing a headline that suggested that bitcoins were being counterfeited.  Even if it was true, the writer then mentions that bitcoins are 'unregulated' virtual currency in the content of the article... now wait a sec, how does one counterfeit and get arrested for something that is unregulated... that sounds like regulation to me!  Even if this guy had his facts right, which he doesn't, his article simply doesn't make sense and shouldn't have been posted... doesn't anyone at the LA TIMES oversee what literature they allow to be posted with their name on it?

I just think 'journalists' have a responsibility to at least type something into google to check their facts before spreading information.  My thoughts upon reading this and all the other recent articles that contain 'facts' about bitcoin that are wrong, is how does this effect the average person or noob to bitcoin?  How many people might think 'oh, bitcoins can be counterfeited, better not get into that' and other such silly notions that are derived from bad news and media practices (like not fact checking...)

Probably the manner by which they did the math led them to believe that it's a better use of their time to sell shovels than to dig around for gold.  (It's pretty profitable to sell a dream...)

Maybe they are mining too, more likely than not, they were mining long before selling the equipment, maybe still are, but have too many shovels? (Maybe to support the network?)

Another thought, possibly by providing mining rigs to the public it brings more attention to bitcoin and helps solidify it as a reality in the eye of the general populace...