|
sales are confirmed by walletbit, if they confirms your orders then it is fine. Do not write a ticket to Avalon again asking for the same thing.
also we are going to cut off the partial orders very soon, walletbit will be making an announcement regarding who paid for partial orders that still did not complete the payment, a refund will be issued. At this point, we are stopping letting people complete their partial orders, not to mention bitcoin is about $5 higher than it was, it is in your favor to get the refund and then decided whether you wish to purchase or not when the time batch two reopens again.
|
|
|
|
Maybe Jeff can heat up a room to 85F or so and let it run to see what happens.
Avalon is designed to operate at 35C, not a problem. |
|
|
|
overheating is not the issue here. see http://imgur.com/a/5GqixI'm sure Jeff can confirm these numbers on his device as well. as for memleak, we found it but that didn't solve all the issues. expect a controller update soon and a newsletter. |
|
|
|
By proper support you mean support from you? Pfft. No wonder.
...
No, by proper support I mean anyone who does the code would need the hardware to make it optimal and to not stifle code development by others (and a github account would be necessary also) As I said above, that will hopefully be Xiangfu. It could actually be best to be ckolivas ... but anyway ... Yes your question has an answer of "No" even though you follow it with a long post of mostly rubbish making an incorrect assumption it is "Yes" Well, then. I man up and apologizes for doubting your intention. I suppose I read too much into it, and now can move on to better things. |
|
|
|
By proper support you mean support from you? Pfft. No wonder. Yes, then it was very obvious. We never expected support from you especially if you do not have the hardware. I didn't understand the intention of your lengthy message about how it is our job to support our own code, it was redundant; especially the part where you mentioned how everyone else is providing you hardware to support instead. when I tried to understand your logic behind "no one asked me a question but I'm answering anyways" logic frankly speaking it sounded like this instead, Hey I haven't heard from you guys so I presumed you are getting your own coffee beans(since I haven't heard from you so I presumed you guys are handling support yourselves) I know you guys are not buying coffee(getting support) from me right now and I have the best(am a cgminer codebase maintainer), but just you know, since you never asked to buy my coffee beans for this cafe(never asked me to support this device), I'm here to tell you won't have the best coffee.(can't have proper support)
p.s.
rest of the cafe's on this block is buying coffee beans from me(sending units/hardwares for me to support) That's sounds like the definition of self important bullshit if I ever heard one. Now, if that is not your intention for things can get lost in translation coming from the southern hemisphere then allow me to man up and apologize in advance for I have wronged you. Otherwise? Fuck you.  |
|
|
|
|
sigh, you know what, I've lost faith in you kano. I'll leave you with some parting notes for historical purposes.
- xiangfu can get access to units anytime he wishes, physically; there is a unit for him once various mess due to CNY blows over; the real cause is lack of time, all your other "guesses" are incorrect. fact: none of the people on the Avalon team have their own units yet.
- I should have known better when you nitpicked me on the "patch" vs "pull request" issue before. The removal of debugging information is still my answer, but this is not cgminer related, it is however still the reason why we can't just push the repo to a public git somewhere. If you choose to interpret this as violation of license that's up to you.
I think next time in the future like with batch two, I will only announce things at their worst possible outcome, so people won't complain as much and there's nothing to troll. e.g.
- batch #1 will finish shipping by end of Feb, 2013 as originally stated when this project first started back in September.
- source code will release 30 days to comply to an infringement notice from a copyright holder.
- not announce anything regarding open sourcing and show up one day with a github url.
- and the list goes on.
|
|
|
|
|
orders are not opened while we solve the ordering issues existing previously so no orders are opened at the moment.
|
|
|
|
Amazing, and I thought my English needs improvement. Don't even get me started on how you imply every other sentence. So you consider sending someone hardware and they having to do software code and general support for who knows how long? A year? as free
I've no fucking idea what part of New York you live in and what people there think, but I do wonder what things you require that you consider people should do for you that you consider worth nothing.
Here you imply: - 1. Assuming I, who did not sent you a unit thinks open source support is free, - 2. Assumed more by providing support you justify for hardware, thus should receive one. - 3. drag New York into this for no fucking reason, is the bold parts even English? That I'm not sure, but yet again, another assumption. I also will note that you got Xiangfu to do the driver software development but did NOT give him an Avalon.
I wonder if he got ripped off with what you paid him for that ...
An Avalon is only $1300 retail ... Here's what you imply: 1. Assuming I did not give Xiangfu a unit, every Avalon developer is entitled to a special unit with gold-plated PCB and signed unit, but we've been so busy we didn't even celebrate our chip success yet, which is now more than a month ago. I wonder if he got ripped off with what you paid him for that ... 2. What the fuck are you trying to imply here scum? For your information, xiangfu named his own price. 3. Why is the price of the unit a factor here? Though I will point out for others, that you did NOT get the cgminer source for free.
It came with the GPL license requirements.
When did I mention I got this for free? more imply please. When did I violate GPL license requirement? Oh wait, as you said, I did not. But if you are going to come into my thread a year ago stating on how every other ASIC manufacture has been given developers free units so they may support their hardware and if I and Avalon choose not to do this you will not provide support then I'll reject you on sheer principle fucking level.
Good day.
Good for you - that's your principle. Though I'd like to see the quote you are implying ... ... ... ... Here you go: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120184.msg1317892#msg1317892Let's say I was wrong and you didn't say "If you want support then you must provide me hardware." because you assumed I was going to ask you to provide support. THEN what's the problem you have with Avalon that "piss you off" aside from the fact we are slow to provide source code, but is still within the definition of GPLv3? |
|
|
|
...
also, open source =/= support.
Exactly ... but your words also exactly were: ...
You are pissed off because we haven't got around to release source code yet or the fact we did not giving you a free unit?
So you consider sending someone hardware and they having to do software code and general support for who knows how long? A year? as freeI've no fucking idea what part of NewYork you live in and what people there think, but I do wonder what things you require that you consider people should do for you that you consider worth nothing. I also will note that you got Xiangfu to do the driver software development but did NOT give him an Avalon. I wonder if he got ripped off with what you paid him for that ... An Avalon is only $1300 retail ... Though I will point out for others, that you did NOT get the cgminer source for free. It came with the GPL license requirements. I also will note that you got Xiangfu to do the driver software development but did NOT give him an Avalon.  So you are making up things now? I've no fucking idea what part of NewYork you live in and what people there think, but I do wonder what things you require that you consider people should do for you that you consider worth nothing. and I have no idea where you got the impression we are asking you to do software code and general support for Avalon. As with all open source things, those who wish to support it can do so. This is not something we are entitled to have, nor something you are required to do. It's your choice to support and it is Avalon's choice to decide who gets free units and other perks. If you had purchased this unit much like many other developers of bitcoin, and/or bitcoin related projects I may have given discounts, priority shipping and other various bonus which you will no doubt have qualified for. But if you are going to come into my thread a year ago stating on how every other ASIC manufacture has been given developers free units so they may support their hardware and if I and Avalon choose not to do this you will not provide support then I'll reject you on sheer principle fucking level. Good day. |
|
|
|
Yeah why am I not surprised you would make that statement. Based on what grounds have you made that bullshit statement? Here, is this easy enough to understand ... I DONT WANT ONE. I do not wish to support Avalon and their underhanded "OpenSource" tactics. I already had this discussion in the Avalon forum last year with BitSyncom where I clearly stated that if you guys develop the code and we don't have the hardware - then you will be the ones to support the code. Any idiot who can't follow the meaning of that (PuertoLibre) can go jump for all I care. I'm pissed at the fact that Avalon pretend to be all Open Source and represent yourself that way to the community (and on your web site) but the reality is you haven't even released the code yet - that you said you would do. One of your early responses to that was also something that could easily turn into a violation of the code license - as I pointed out before and it also explains clearly at those links I posted recently. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=141300.msg1506413#msg1506413The early response was: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=137534.msg1470005#msg1470005...
Good call, to your answer your question: the source code will be uploaded to github soon as we remove a bunch of debug related stuff.
So it's simple to take this comment as bullshit or ignorance about the GPL3 license - you choose which one it is. Though ignorance wont get you far since I posted links that clearly explains the GPL issues for those who don't know anything about that ... So ... does that put the Avalon OpenSource friendly people under the heading of "Ignorant about the GPL License"? Seriously? Yes you have so far avoided breaking the license by not even releasing the code coz apparently no one has rightfully requested it ... or there are only 2 Avalons out and for some unknown reason those who got them are not interested in asking for it, or have got it and are not interested in releasing the source code themselves.BFL have never stated that they are all OpenSource - they have proprietary items in their system that they themselves state are proprietary. However, you can already get access to the cgminer source code for the Nexus7 ... it's publicly available in github ... because it is based on a publicly available OpenSource GPL piece of software ... called cgminer ... oddly that's the same as the Avalon miner ... but which of the 2 companies is pissing around hiding the code? So far Avalon said they reached their ship date 3 weeks ago (which means they had the source code then, that is necessary to meet the license requirements for anyone who got an Avalon) but still no sign of the code. Hence the low priority, if you wish to comment on GPL3 compliance, all we actually have to do it release source within 30 days as per stated on GPL3. Also let me explain this "debug related" stuff for a second, this is not cgminer related at all, the repo also contains the FPGA controller and various other things we don't wish to release without proper explanation and agreements in the future e.g. overclocking parameters. If anything though, I'll apologize for tardiness of the situation. You would've also simply asked for an ETA and I would've provided one. Anyhow: the source code release is set for this weekend on our project timeline at the moment. also, open source =/= support. |
|
|
|
Feb-2 Hey Josh, you got any update on where your guys are at? I'm certainly not someone to promote your guys unsubstantiated claims coz of your crap history (even with the ASIC), and you know full well I've never been a fan of BFL, but the Avalon people are really pissing me off, Tom's gone down the drain, and I would certainly be happy to be able to run a BFL ASIC on an rpi and show it leaving Avalon's shit in the dust. ... ... So ... when is anything happening at BFL? P.S. if anything I've said on the forum lately has pissed your guys off - oh well, damn shame You are pissed off because we haven't got around to release source code yet or the fact we did not giving you a free unit? |
|
|
|
|
Because it wasn't about the money?
|
|
|
|
|
aware of this situation, it'll return soon.
|
|
|
|
I do understand Yifu would like for the bitcoin community to grow in fact. I am sure this is why he supported Paysius, and Walletbit since not many people even knew who they where.
This is exactly the reason. Walletbit has since then fixed all their issues overnight. Real world performance is important, and what better way to test their system with a DDoS-like shopping experience? In this field competition is necessary for growth, look at what happened with the ASICs. |
|
|
|
|
power consumption on site fixed to reflect end-user situations.
Chip power efficienty: 6.6W/GHs @ 1.15 V
Module power consumption: 149W @ 20GHs
machine power consumption: 595W @ 220V-AC | 620W @ 120V-AC
|
|
|
|
All orders for incorrect amounts will be fully refunded.
WalletBit will return these funds to the Bitcoin addresses they were sent from. These units will be restored to the sales queue. At a time of Avalon's choosing they will re-open sales for these remaining units. All orders processed at the correct exchange rate will still be honored.
This doesn't make sense though. The people who paid the incorrect amounts did so to submit the order, as that was their only option. Why not keep the orders and simply send a new payment request for each order, this is very easy to do and honors the transaction. It was out of people's control on who recieved a correct payment page, and who received and incorrect payment page. this this indeed By that logic so If the bug was not $1, but $10000 you guys would've still paid? Again: there's no such thing as placeholder order It was a bug and it will be refunded, and orders will open again in the future for those who did not manage to place an proper order. this is final. |
|
|
|
|
there is no such thing as a placeholder order, there was only a mistake, which will have to get fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
newsletter sent, thread updated, systems checked. Let's play.
|
|
|
|
on that site was 399/499 a week ago, I saw when It was first posted on the "AVALON ships" thread, but of course now only the webmaster can confirm that. That's a typo, it's 300, and 400 as ORIGINALLY announced here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110090.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
