Kano vs Bitsyncom

[BitSyncom]

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?

[1715584049]

1715584049

[1715584049]

1715584049

[1715584049]

1715584049

[Korbman]

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?

Ha, this made me laugh.

He rises from the dead to post in the BFL thread while ignoring all the questions in the Avalon threads. Good choices BitSyncom

[PuertoLibre]

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?

Exactly.

Thumb through Kano's posts and anyone can get the picture.

[SgtSpike]

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?

I'd be pissed off at both.

[Flying Hellfish]

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?

Ha, this made me laugh.

He rises from the dead to post in the BFL thread while ignoring all the questions in the Avalon threads. Good choices BitSyncom

Me too.

Welcome to Deadwood!!!

When I think of Avalon it reminds me of dinner time at home when I was a kid, every night Mama made two dinners for the family...  they were, Take it or Leave it!

CS just doesn't appear to be a priority for them and I guess when demand exceeds supply by several multiples you can really do whatever the hell you want LOL.  IMO its probably not the best long term business model but meh maybe the western idea of CS is outdated and I'm just old and crazy and this is the wave of the future!

[kano]

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?

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#msg1506413

The 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.

[Nemesis]

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?

You've proved why chinese are scums in this industry. You violated GPL license yet still have no shame as if you've accomplished something.
Go back to "shipping" your precious device.

[nathanrees19]

You are pissed off because we haven't got around to release source code yet

Your arrogance is fucking astounding. You're practically taking a steaming shit on the GPL by holding back the source.

How about you spend less time trolling and more time releasing the fucking source code?

[BitSyncom]

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#msg1506413

The 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.

[nathanrees19]

the source code release is set for this weekend on our project timeline at the moment.

All of it, or just the first two lines?

[kano]

...
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 free

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.

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.

[BitSyncom]

...
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 free

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.

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.

[kano]

...
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 free

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.

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?

No you are lying.

Code:

Jan 31 UTC+11
22:31 < xiangfu> conman: thanks to the cgminer. and I even don't have one. :)

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.

... and I have no idea where I have EVER said ANYWHERE on this forum what you are implying.
You are making up shit to try and cover yourself. Fuck off.

I have never expected to receive ANY hardware from anyone for free.
I've only expected that if someone did send me hardware that they would be wanting me to support it.
AS I ALREADY DID WITH THE ICARUS

Your trying to turn this into crap that it isn't - what are you hiding?

Yes I do understand your choice to ignore the software developers of the code you've used.
I knew that last year ... I was told it on 31-Dec

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 ... ... ... ...

[BitSyncom]

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#msg1317892



Let'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?

[Vicus]

BitSyncom,
Maybe you should stop chatting with one, who not even your customer and spend little more time for your real customers? We haven't heard anything about batch #1 shipping since Jan 29(?), and anything about batch #2 from Feb 2. Please take some time, and update status for your customers pleasure.
Thank you.

PS: Even more pleasure for you customers would be an answers at your support helpdesk.

[kano]

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,

Seems pretty obvious from this statement:

...
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?

What's next - you'll say you never said that?

- 2. Assumed more by providing support you justify for hardware, thus should receive one.

Learning to read are we?
I've already clearly stated I don't want an Avalon.
Was that too hard to understand?

- 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.

Well since that is where you are from, I was wondering if this assumption, that people who might provide support should do it for free, was some sort of local custom?

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.

No actually it's quite simple, had you given him a unit, the current well known problems and bugs with the Avalon could have be resolved already.

But no doubt supporting your customers is something you don't give a shit about ... as per the posts above mine ...

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?

I wonder if he asked for an Avalon and was rejected?

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.

Try again ... read it ... don't skip words ... not even the big ones ... "others"

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#msg1317892



Let'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.

At least learn how to quote retard.
Go read that link again ... it says:

Thirdly, hardware is required for proper support.

Yes I know you don't want your Avalon users to get proper support.
That's been clear already.
But when you quote someone ... don't edit it first ... sheesh what lies are you going to spread next?

Well there was the statement about building 12 Avalons a day since 20-Jan.
I wonder if that is true?
You should have built 180 by now if you only worked on week days.
That's more than half the first batch already.
Hopefully your customers will get them soon ..............

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?

The problem I have with Avalon that "piss me off" is that your've used the source code to make your product work and still not yet released the source code and on top of that used an excuse that directly implies a violation of the source code license.
A group of people who claim how "Open Source" they are and yet you made such a stupid comment about editing the code before releasing it.
I don't give a shit about what other code you have that you guys wrote - I'm of course only referring to cgminer.
Your supposed to be smart, yet I have to explain that to you? Wow - I've well over estimated you.

So: You already have the code - or Jeff and the Foundation are lying?
I think it's pretty obvious which is correct: you have the code and have had it for weeks.
Your hiding it ... for who knows what reason ...

... and lastly ...
Are you smart enough to spot something else you are doing?
You're (with my help) dragging the Avalon name through the dirt in the BFL thread.
Yeah smart move that one

[Phinnaeus Gage]

orders are not opened while we solve the ordering issues existing previously so no orders are opened at the moment.

After trying to ream Kano a new asshole, the able is all that was offered up to Avalon's clients. Totally amazing!

[BitSyncom]

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.

[johnyj]

fact: none of the people on the Avalon team have their own units yet.

 

[kano]

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.

Yeah I get it.
Being open (and open source) and the best of the ASIC producers was too much for you.
As soon as something changed that made that difficult, your ideals were ... something else all together.
You've sunk to the level of hiding information and not supporting your customers and not giving them updates.

As for debugging, ah OK, 182 Avalons contain this debugging that's somehow problematic.
Oops ...

Anyone considering buying an Avalon should take this into consideration:

I think next time in the future like with batch two, I will only announce things at their worst possible outcome ...

[PuertoLibre]

A story of a whimsical relationship between one ASIC manufacturer and an unrequited (left wanting) software developer.

<Key scene in the public washroom (Asia style)>:

Kano: You know, I would love to code for Avalon.
Yifu: I bet you would. <Eyeball Kano for 5 seconds.>
Kano: You know, if I find an Avalon unit under my towel in the dressing room I just might keep and maintain code for it.
Yifu: <Scrubs his own back ignoring him.> I think we've got it covered.
Kano: You can scrub my back, I'll scrub yours?
<Kano waits for 10 minutes...nothing happens.>

<Yifu gets up afterwards and walks to the dressing room.>

<Key Kano throwing a hissy fit.>: I can't believe you won't send me an Avalon! How dare you?! ^&*^&*(

Yifu: Sorry, but we already have someone we paid for the software side of things. I simply do not need your "help" at this time.

Kano: Damn you! Do you expect me to work for freee?! I scratch you back, you scratch mine! Don't you understand you New Yorker!?

Yifu: WTF? Man, I don't need your help.

Kano: WTH? Didn't you just see me try to pressure you into leaving an Avalon under the towel?

Yifu: Look, if we need contracted labor we can pay for it. Right now, Xianfu (sorry I forgot his name) already has us covered for development.

Kano: You don't understand, I will keep developing software for you as long as you give me hardware! WTF don't you understand? Where is your source code?

Yifu: Look we will release it soon. Thats all.

Kano: NO you WON'T. I know you WON"T. READ the GPLv3 mutha...^&*^&*! You don't have a choice, give it to me NOW.

Kano: I know what going on here; You paid this xianfu in Avalons didn't you?!

Yifu: Look sir, don't speculate you don't know our contractual arrangements.

Yifu: Further, we will release it soon enough.

Kano: That is why you (Avalon) are such washed up has beens! You don't understand that if you just put the damn Avalon's under my Towel like I asked you to, you would be covered. Maybe...if I feel like it.

Kano: You guys suck!

Yifu: Look, we can give out units to those we think would appreciate it. So ^&*^ off.

-------------------
<Key scene of the top of a building and Kano wielding a rusty sword high in the sky. Ranting and raving>

Kano: I never asked outright for an Avalon. And you know what? I don't want one! I never asked for one. I WOULD HAVE...POSSIBLY, if I felt like it....provided labor for the price of an Avalon.

Kano: No obligations though!

------------------


Moral of the story, if you want to engage in programming AND be COMPENSATED. Sign a contract. Don't posture and pester someone. Then get angry and enrage in revisionist forum history to make yourself look better.

You don't understand what the open source community contributions are about. You want compensation. Whether subtle or blatant. Find donors, collect some bitcoins. Be nice to Yifu and get it paid off.

Or sign a contract where he and you agree on an expected level of service.

Before you say that not how it is, keep in mind the machine you wanted sent to you (for free) and for development purposes is also compensating you every day with Bitcoins on an ongoing basis.

Pay the man, or sign a contract for a specific guarantee, or at least be nice enough to let him bribe you. If it were possible at this stage.

[kano]

...
Moral of the story, if you want to engage in programming AND be COMPENSATED. Sign a contract. Don't posture and pester someone. Then get angry and enrage in revisionist forum history to make yourself look better.

You don't understand what the open source community contributions are about. You want compensation. Whether subtle or blatant. Find donors, collect some bitcoins. Be nice to Yifu and get it paid off.

Or sign a contract where he and you agree on an expected level of service.

Before you say that not how it is, keep in mind the machine you wanted sent to you (for free) and for development purposes is also compensating you every day with Bitcoins on an ongoing basis.

Pay the man, or sign a contract for a specific guarantee, or at least be nice enough to let him bribe you. If it were possible at this stage.

Moral of the story, don't quote any posts anywhere on the forum and you can then pretend anything you say is true and make up anything you like.

Go read that link and what I said there and after it, instead of making up shit and proving your an idiot.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120184.msg1317892#msg1317892

[bce]

Could it be this simple?

Kano respects cgminer, and is proud of his role in forwarding the development of cgminer.
A modified cgminer is used in Jeff Garzik's Avalon with a closed-source device.
Jeff Garzik's Avalon crashes once per day and needs to be restarted.  Memory leak? who knows.


Could it be that Kano simply has respect for how he feels cgminer should be, and Avalon should have tested before shipping?

Just a thought, but does that sound about right?


Kano,
I hope your trip to the US to visit BFL as the SC line begins assembly and shipping later this month is a good one!
Thanks for the the improvements that you have made to cgminer

[PuertoLibre]

...
Moral of the story, if you want to engage in programming AND be COMPENSATED. Sign a contract. Don't posture and pester someone. Then get angry and enrage in revisionist forum history to make yourself look better.

You don't understand what the open source community contributions are about. You want compensation. Whether subtle or blatant. Find donors, collect some bitcoins. Be nice to Yifu and get it paid off.

Or sign a contract where he and you agree on an expected level of service.

Before you say that not how it is, keep in mind the machine you wanted sent to you (for free) and for development purposes is also compensating you every day with Bitcoins on an ongoing basis.

Pay the man, or sign a contract for a specific guarantee, or at least be nice enough to let him bribe you. If it were possible at this stage.

Moral of the story, don't quote any posts anywhere on the forum and you can then pretend anything you say is true and make up anything you like.

Go read that link and what I said there and after it, instead of making up shit and proving your an idiot.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=120184.msg1317892#msg1317892

What do I look like, a search engine?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=36044;sa=showPosts

There, anyone can go read it themselves. For best context, they should look through the threads and read each post with responses and replies.

[PuertoLibre]

Could it be this simple?

Kano respects cgminer, and is proud of his role in forwarding the development of cgminer.
A modified cgminer is used in Jeff Garzik's Avalon with a closed-source device.
Jeff Garzik's Avalon crashes once per day and needs to be restarted.  Memory leak? who knows.


Could it be that Kano simply has respect for how he feels cgminer should be, and Avalon should have tested before shipping?

Just a thought, but does that sound about right?

Yet, it doesn't actually flow with what Kano himself says.

He literally repeats what he has said already in the past.

Kano is a great programmer, I have little doubt on that. But he wants someone to butter his bread. When that someone says no, he goes into the samurai toting ninja you see above.

The last thing he is currently hiding behind is the release of the source code. Beyond that his attitude will stay much the same.

What do you think he would say of BFL if they sent him home without hardware? Or worse, asked him to actually pay for it?

Edit: The only thing I see is that Kano wants something and he approached it in all the wrong ways. Things didn't go well. bASIC folded. Avalon said No, BFL said yes.

He can hide behind "the source code has not been released" issue for a while longer. When it is released, his opinion won't change will it? I wonder why?

[bce]

Could it be this simple?

Kano respects cgminer, and is proud of his role in forwarding the development of cgminer.
A modified cgminer is used in Jeff Garzik's Avalon with a closed-source device.
Jeff Garzik's Avalon crashes once per day and needs to be restarted.  Memory leak? who knows.


Could it be that Kano simply has respect for how he feels cgminer should be, and Avalon should have tested before shipping?

Just a thought, but does that sound about right?

Yet, it doesn't actually flow with what Kano himself says.

He literally repeats what he has said already in the past.

Kano is a great programmer, I have little doubt on that. But he wants someone to butter his bread. When that someone says no, he goes into the samurai toting ninja you see above.

The last thing he is currently hiding behind is the release of the source code. Beyond that his attitude will stay much the same.

What do you think he would say of BFL if they sent him home without hardware? Or worse, asked him to actually pay for it?

Edit: The only thing I see is that Kano wants something and he approached it in all the wrong ways. Things didn't go well. bASIC folded. Avalon said No, BFL said yes.

He can hide behind "the source code has not been released" issue for a while longer. When it is released, his opinion won't change will it? I wonder why?

Well, again -

Avalon runs well, then restarts every 24 hours.   That would frustrate the hell out of me, as it'd be so easy for me to help out if I were Kano.  I am not Kano, but I could imagine.

We elected Kano as one of the representatives to be invited by BFL to visit its facility, due to his ability to discern a scam and to possibly test the SC line of hardware himself.  At this point, BFL is obviously not a scam.

By the way, I notice that Kano's avatar has changed.  Is that why you called him "the samurai toting ninja?"   I also notice that your avatar has changed to one that does not include the words "Avalon Asic" or a picture of an Avalon Asic.   Any reason for that?    

[nathanrees19]

it is however still the reason why we can't just push the repo to a public git somewhere

Yes you can. Add a warning saying "run XYZ and your unit will be fucked", then push it. Done.

[Dalkore]

- batch #1 will finish shipping by end of Feb, 2013 as originally stated when this project first started back in September.

Should Batch #2 customer just assume that everything in on schedule?   Atleast I never got an emailed confirmation or order number from Avalon.  Is that in the works?   Little updates go a long way and should not be seen as a hassle.

[kano]

Could it be this simple?

Kano respects cgminer, and is proud of his role in forwarding the development of cgminer.
A modified cgminer is used in Jeff Garzik's Avalon with a closed-source device.
Jeff Garzik's Avalon crashes once per day and needs to be restarted.  Memory leak? who knows.


Could it be that Kano simply has respect for how he feels cgminer should be, and Avalon should have tested before shipping?

Just a thought, but does that sound about right?

Yet, it doesn't actually flow with what Kano himself says.

He literally repeats what he has said already in the past.

Kano is a great programmer, I have little doubt on that. But he wants someone to butter his bread. When that someone says no, he goes into the samurai toting ninja you see above.

The last thing he is currently hiding behind is the release of the source code. Beyond that his attitude will stay much the same.

What do you think he would say of BFL if they sent him home without hardware? Or worse, asked him to actually pay for it?

Edit: The only thing I see is that Kano wants something and he approached it in all the wrong ways. Things didn't go well. bASIC folded. Avalon said No, BFL said yes.

He can hide behind "the source code has not been released" issue for a while longer. When it is released, his opinion won't change will it? I wonder why?

No, if you had even half a brain, you would have bothered to read the comments I made back then.
Anyone can see that I'm actually also saying that they don't really even need me to do it.
I have a habit of writing posts/PMs like that with too much info in them that can say, yes you don't need my help.

So just in case you have some deficiency that makes clicking on links and reading difficult, I'll quote it here:

Thirdly, hardware is required for proper support.
If you are going to support all the cgminer requests regarding your changes then that covers one part of it, but if we start getting support requests regarding the software and have no hardware to run it on, then at least some of those support requests are just going to be sent to you.

Every time changes go into cgminer, if we have no hardware to test the changes we can of course not be sure of the effect of those changes on different hardware.
Rarely will it be an issue, but when it is an issue, if we have no hardware, the answer is: well that's unfortunate.

I am stating the obvious, but I thought I better say it here anyway.

Now as most people already know: both BFL and bASIC are sending devs (us and others) hardware to get it working in time for release
(BFL has also stated they are flying me to the USA and yochdog across the USA to see their manufacturing and report to the community)

You seem to want to do the software yourself, but just realise that you may also end up being the ones to support it if only you have the hardware ...

As I said "I am stating the obvious" and I'd wonder where that quote says "You must send me an Avalon"
Feel free to point it out ... I can't see it and I can't remember saying it ...

That above is the quote that even BitSyncom calls

...
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.

My point was that I can't properly support it ... I thought it was pretty clear ... when I said
"Thirdly, hardware is required for proper support."

I guess the problem may be that I can magically provide support without hardware?
I don't know.
My statement was pretty clear saying that I can't provide support without hardware.
It wasn't a "you must send me hardware" it was "if I don't have hardware I can't support it"
That's like obvious ... as I said: "I am stating the obvious"

So pointing out the truth is now a reason for an Avalon tech guy to turn it into

... I'll reject you on sheer principle fucking level.

...
What do I look like, a search engine?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=36044;sa=showPosts

There, anyone can go read it themselves. For best context, they should look through the threads and read each post with responses and replies.

Yeah I'm not sure why you need to be a google expert to actually check your posts are true ... in your case yeah just misrepresent the facts and blame not being smart enough to use google ...

[Keninishna]

and this is why we can't have nice things.

[Bicknellski]

and this is why we can't have nice things.

+1 Yuup.

[PuertoLibre]

Could it be this simple?

Kano respects cgminer, and is proud of his role in forwarding the development of cgminer.
A modified cgminer is used in Jeff Garzik's Avalon with a closed-source device.
Jeff Garzik's Avalon crashes once per day and needs to be restarted.  Memory leak? who knows.


Could it be that Kano simply has respect for how he feels cgminer should be, and Avalon should have tested before shipping?

Just a thought, but does that sound about right?

Yet, it doesn't actually flow with what Kano himself says.

He literally repeats what he has said already in the past.

Kano is a great programmer, I have little doubt on that. But he wants someone to butter his bread. When that someone says no, he goes into the samurai toting ninja you see above.

The last thing he is currently hiding behind is the release of the source code. Beyond that his attitude will stay much the same.

What do you think he would say of BFL if they sent him home without hardware? Or worse, asked him to actually pay for it?

Edit: The only thing I see is that Kano wants something and he approached it in all the wrong ways. Things didn't go well. bASIC folded. Avalon said No, BFL said yes.

He can hide behind "the source code has not been released" issue for a while longer. When it is released, his opinion won't change will it? I wonder why?

Well, again -

Avalon runs well, then restarts every 24 hours.   That would frustrate the hell out of me, as it'd be so easy for me to help out if I were Kano.  I am not Kano, but I could imagine.

We elected Kano as one of the representatives to be invited by BFL to visit its facility, due to his ability to discern a scam and to possibly test the SC line of hardware himself.  At this point, BFL is obviously not a scam.

By the way, I notice that Kano's avatar has changed.  Is that why you called him "the samurai toting ninja?"   I also notice that your avatar has changed to one that does not include the words "Avalon Asic" or a picture of an Avalon Asic.   Any reason for that?    

I was just changing my avatars since several people were doing it as well.

That and I was literally drinking coke as I looked up the picture.

[PuertoLibre]

Could it be this simple?

Kano respects cgminer, and is proud of his role in forwarding the development of cgminer.
A modified cgminer is used in Jeff Garzik's Avalon with a closed-source device.
Jeff Garzik's Avalon crashes once per day and needs to be restarted.  Memory leak? who knows.


Could it be that Kano simply has respect for how he feels cgminer should be, and Avalon should have tested before shipping?

Just a thought, but does that sound about right?

Yet, it doesn't actually flow with what Kano himself says.

He literally repeats what he has said already in the past.

Kano is a great programmer, I have little doubt on that. But he wants someone to butter his bread. When that someone says no, he goes into the samurai toting ninja you see above.

The last thing he is currently hiding behind is the release of the source code. Beyond that his attitude will stay much the same.

What do you think he would say of BFL if they sent him home without hardware? Or worse, asked him to actually pay for it?

Edit: The only thing I see is that Kano wants something and he approached it in all the wrong ways. Things didn't go well. bASIC folded. Avalon said No, BFL said yes.

He can hide behind "the source code has not been released" issue for a while longer. When it is released, his opinion won't change will it? I wonder why?

No, if you had even half a brain, you would have bothered to read the comments I made back then.
Anyone can see that I'm actually also saying that they don't really even need me to do it.
I have a habit of writing posts/PMs like that with too much info in them that can say, yes you don't need my help.

So just in case you have some deficiency that makes clicking on links and reading difficult, I'll quote it here:

Thirdly, hardware is required for proper support.
If you are going to support all the cgminer requests regarding your changes then that covers one part of it, but if we start getting support requests regarding the software and have no hardware to run it on, then at least some of those support requests are just going to be sent to you.

Every time changes go into cgminer, if we have no hardware to test the changes we can of course not be sure of the effect of those changes on different hardware.
Rarely will it be an issue, but when it is an issue, if we have no hardware, the answer is: well that's unfortunate.

I am stating the obvious, but I thought I better say it here anyway.

Now as most people already know: both BFL and bASIC are sending devs (us and others) hardware to get it working in time for release
(BFL has also stated they are flying me to the USA and yochdog across the USA to see their manufacturing and report to the community)

You seem to want to do the software yourself, but just realise that you may also end up being the ones to support it if only you have the hardware ...

As I said "I am stating the obvious" and I'd wonder where that quote says "You must send me an Avalon"
Feel free to point it out ... I can't see it and I can't remember saying it ...

That above is the quote that even BitSyncom calls

...
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.

My point was that I can't properly support it ... I thought it was pretty clear ... when I said
"Thirdly, hardware is required for proper support."

I guess the problem may be that I can magically provide support without hardware?
I don't know.
My statement was pretty clear saying that I can't provide support without hardware.
It wasn't a "you must send me hardware" it was "if I don't have hardware I can't support it"
That's like obvious ... as I said: "I am stating the obvious"

So pointing out the truth is now a reason for an Avalon tech guy to turn it into

... I'll reject you on sheer principle fucking level.

...
What do I look like, a search engine?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=36044;sa=showPosts

There, anyone can go read it themselves. For best context, they should look through the threads and read each post with responses and replies.

Yeah I'm not sure why you need to be a google expert to actually check your posts are true ... in your case yeah just misrepresent the facts and blame not being smart enough to use google ...

I noticed you added links to my and Bitsyncom posts.

But you seemingly quoted yours without links. In either case, I already read those.

[PuertoLibre]

My point was that I can't properly support it ... I thought it was pretty clear ... when I said
"Thirdly, hardware is required for proper support."

Start crackin' on asking for those donations from the community. That will resolve your issues.

You are clearly aware of this as a "requirement". Now it is up to you to resolve the issue with purchasing of hardware. Don't wait for it to come to you, start asking for donations.

Lots of people in the linux and other open source communities do that for the developers. People say they respect you quite a bit for your work. So show them there is a need and ask them to provide it for you.

Or be nicer to Yifu and ask nicely for a discount after asking for donations to purchase the required hardware.

-----------------------

Your ultimate "spin" on this topic is that you need to be provided with hardware. Well, you can very easily come half way and get the hardware. Perhaps they will extend a discount for your purchase as a developer.

It doesn't have to come "to you" out of an implied sense of entitlement.

I guess the problem may be that I can magically provide support without hardware?
I don't know.

Ask for donations. You are a critical programmer of cgminer are you not?

Do you not have the support of the community?

My statement was pretty clear saying that I can't provide support without hardware.
It wasn't a "you must send me hardware" it was "if I don't have hardware I can't support it"
That's like obvious ... as I said: "I am stating the obvious"

So pointing out the truth is now a reason for an Avalon tech guy to turn it into

Work out a plan with Yifu.

Have you ever tried beyond..."Well, you know, I need hardware to program on"

Followed by a:

"Well, you don't expect me to work for free."

----------------------
Kano, your an excellent programmer but your applied "spin" on veiled demands needs some fixes.

[BitSyncom]

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.  

[organofcorti]

Kano, if you can wait a couple of months i'll have one you can borrow for a bit. Not sure how much help that will be, but the offers there if you need it.

[kano]

Kano, if you can wait a couple of months i'll have one you can borrow for a bit. Not sure how much help that will be, but the offers there if you need it.

Well actually the biggest issue right now as far as I understand with the code is that there are problems and fixes and no one has the code and almost no one has the hardware and no one is doing the fixes.
The side effect of a list of things Avalon has done.

I've actually done a lot of USB code over the last 2 months (well not a lot, but a few thousand lines of changes) and it's all been possible coz I have hardware (MMQ FPGA and BFL FPGA) but until I get an ASIC, I've no real hard answers on how it will perform and what problems there will be.
From testing, I do already know the USB code can sometimes be many times faster than the serial-USB code (due to running old and my new versions of cgminer) but until I throw the code at a 60~80GH/s BFL SC Single, I don't know what optimisations and improvements are possible or necessary ... let alone what a 1.5TH/s BFL MiniRig will do
Certainly at this point in the game, there is no way I'd be doing this without the hardware. It's not even possible to do it properly.

The current Avalon code also uses serial-USB ... which I've been trying to get rid of from cgminer coz it sux ... so completely rewriting it is certainly not on the list of things I will ever be doing

But in the case of the Avalon, at this point in time I'm not involved with it and I don't see that changing
(no matter what they say, my interest in it is certainly now almost zero, and I suspect they feel the same)

However, my interest in the cgminer license is totally independent of that.
At least while I'm involved with cgminer, I certainly will always bring up the issue of hiding the code or violating the license where I see it.
I'll do the same with BFL or anyone else, but of course I know with the companies who are supplying me hardware, that there will be no license violation since I will be writing the code and making it publicly available as I always do.

Long term (i.e. a few months when you get yours) hopefully there will already be someone else looking after it.
But it wont be me.

Thanks indeed for the offer, but I don't suspect I'll ever take it.
However, from what BitSyncom has said, Xiangfu will be getting an Avalon ... some time ... so hopefully he will be the one to maintain the code since he will have the hardware
We see him in the #cgminer channel often (and yes also when he was asking about how to do the Avalon code last year

I can seriously say at this point in time, that if the BFL SC Single does do 60~80GH/s at ~100W, I certainly wont want an Avalon.
But at this point in time that still isn't certain ... though I'll not be surprised if that does become a certainly in the very near future.
However, like when bASIC started, I do hope there will be some other company providing competition with BFL ...
Such a pity bASIC went down the drain.

[kano]

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"

[BitSyncom]

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.

[meowmeowbrowncow]

This entire thread was silly and shows negative aspects to each party's personality.

Eh, an overstatement.  I'll just leave this:


1.  Kano.  Thanks for your transport protocol work.
2.  Avalon.  Get your bugs fixed rather than spending time telling ppl to FO on the forum.

[DobZombie]

Feb-2

Hey Josh,
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?

Are you starting a whole thread just to start a fight with Kano?

Fuck off you loser.

you should get down on your knees and suck the man off for the software development he has done for the bitcoin community.

[ewibit]

BitSyncom,
Maybe you should stop chatting with one, who not even your customer and spend little more time for your real customers? We haven't heard anything about batch #1 shipping since Jan 29(?), and anything about batch #2 from Feb 2. Please take some time, and update status for your customers pleasure.
Thank you.

+1 

[Clearfly]

BitSyncom,
Maybe you should stop chatting with one, who not even your customer and spend little more time for your real customers? We haven't heard anything about batch #1 shipping since Jan 29(?), and anything about batch #2 from Feb 2. Please take some time, and update status for your customers pleasure.
Thank you.

PS: Even more pleasure for you customers would be an answers at your support helpdesk.

+2  

Seems they have plenty of time on their hands to have a bitching war on the forums here. But no time to deal with their clients.
Seems like Avalon have something to hide. And i bet that something is that they spent all batch#1 money on development and only produced a few units. batch#2 will be funding batch#1 orders.

[coastermonger]

Yifu G.,

To put things very plainly:
I believe some people are upset that they have paid for an Avalon ASIC unit and received no confirmation email from Avalon themselves.  These emails are important and they help to settle doubt. 

It's pretty easy to see that you guys are still sorting through the preorders, that is fine, but just know that a simple email saying "we received your payment, your shipping address is..." can go very far.

-Coaster

[Korbman]

Seems like Avalon have something to hide. And i bet that something is that they spent all batch#1 money on development and only produced a few units. batch#2 will be funding batch#1 orders.

*Ding Ding Ding* We have a winner!

 

[ElectricMucus]

Kano: I dare you to release all future versions of cgminer under the GPLv2 and not above.  

[maqifrnswa]

Did a business seriously start a public thread just to taunt the (volunteer) developer of their software platform? With friends like these, who needs enemies...

Summary of events:
1) Avalon wants miner software, decides cgminer is a good platform and decides to use it (OK)
2) cgminer's developer asks for hardware so he can properly include it in cgminer (OK)
3) Avalon declines the offer (OK) and finds someone else to code it (OK)
4) Avalon shipped devices with binary code (OK)
5) The cgminer developer requests source code via 6b of GPL-v3. (OK) [EDIT: kano might not have rights to request the code, only those that received the binaries may. If, however, someone emails kano the binary - he may then request the source from the intermediary who must request it from Avalon]
6) Avalon has 30 days to remedy the situation (section 8 GPL-v3, OK)
7) Avalon drags feet as to not give a competitive advantage to competitors (OK), cites "technical" reasons but it doesn't matter, they can just drag their feet.

Why taunt Kano? Fulfill the request (or be liable to legal action) and take care of customers - what's the point of this thread?

[01BTC10]

Yifu G.,

To put things very plainly:
I believe some people are upset that they have paid for an Avalon ASIC unit and received no confirmation email from Avalon themselves.  These emails are important and they help to settle doubt. 

It's pretty easy to see that you guys are still sorting through the preorders, that is fine, but just know that a simple email saying "we received your payment, your shipping address is..." can go very far.

-Coaster

I agree.

[crazyates]

Did a business seriously start a public thread just to taunt the (volunteer) developer of their software platform? With friends like these, who needs enemies...

Summary of events:
1) Avalon wants miner software, decides cgminer is a good platform and decides to use it (OK)
2) cgminer's developer asks for hardware so he can properly include it in cgminer (OK)
3) Avalon declines the offer (OK) and finds someone else to code it (OK)
4) Avalon shipped devices with binary code (OK)
5) The cgminer developer requests source code via 6b of GPL-v3. (OK)
6) Avalon has 30 days to remedy the situation (section 8 GPL-v3, OK)
7) Avalon drags feet as to not give a competitive advantage to competitors (OK), cites "technical" reasons but it doesn't matter, they can just drag their feet.

Why taunt Kano? Fulfil the request (or be liable to legal action) and take care of customers - what's the point of this thread?

Your summery is pretty accurate, except for the fact that Kano can't request the source code, as he's not a customer, and I believe a Mod split this thread out of another one. I do love how they use cgminer software, and then bitch at a CGMiner dev for getting involved. Really?  

[maqifrnswa]

Did a business seriously start a public thread just to taunt the (volunteer) developer of their software platform? With friends like these, who needs enemies...

Summary of events:
1) Avalon wants miner software, decides cgminer is a good platform and decides to use it (OK)
2) cgminer's developer asks for hardware so he can properly include it in cgminer (OK)
3) Avalon declines the offer (OK) and finds someone else to code it (OK)
4) Avalon shipped devices with binary code (OK)
5) The cgminer developer requests source code via 6b of GPL-v3. (OK)
6) Avalon has 30 days to remedy the situation (section 8 GPL-v3, OK)
7) Avalon drags feet as to not give a competitive advantage to competitors (OK), cites "technical" reasons but it doesn't matter, they can just drag their feet.

Why taunt Kano? Fulfil the request (or be liable to legal action) and take care of customers - what's the point of this thread?

Your summery is pretty accurate, except for the fact that Kano can't request the source code, as he's not a customer, and I believe a Mod split this thread out of another one. I do love how they use cgminer software, and then bitch at a CGMiner dev for getting involved. Really?  

Yeah, that's a GPL-v2 thing, not v3. Only those that actually receive the binary code can request it.

[PeterChang]

Kano, please accept Bitsyncom's apology--I think the two of you just got off on the wrong foot. Honestly, Chinese culture doesn't really allow for really elaborate apologies so this is probably as good as it's going to get

I really admire the work that you do for cgminer and I really admire the technical accomplishment that Bitsyncom was able to achieve with building ASICs. I really hope the two of you could patch things up and work together more in the future.

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.

[neotrix]

Kano, please accept Bitsyncom's apology--I think the two of you just got off on the wrong foot. Honestly, Chinese culture doesn't really allow for really elaborate apologies so this is probably as good as it's going to get

I really admire the work that you do for cgminer and I really admire the technical accomplishment that Bitsyncom was able to achieve with building ASICs. I really hope the two of you could patch things up and work together more in the future.

+ 1

Yifu G.,

To put things very plainly:
I believe some people are upset that they have paid for an Avalon ASIC unit and received no confirmation email from Avalon themselves.  These emails are important and they help to settle doubt. 

It's pretty easy to see that you guys are still sorting through the preorders, that is fine, but just know that a simple email saying "we received your payment, your shipping address is..." can go very far.

-Coaster

+ 2

[Elokane]

Dear Yifu,

I am sorry to derail this thread, but after not seeing you active anywhere else on the forums for many days, I am going to grab your attention here:
Can you PLEASE confirm the orders that have been paid for in batch #2? There are those of us who have paid in full for them last week already and have received neither a reply from Walletbit nor from Avalon.

I appreciate that you are dealing with many things at the moment, but surely you realize that many of us have sent you thousands of dollars and have been not received any sign of life from anyone and that this is inconsiderate of your customers.

Thanks.

(My Avalon ticket is #224)

[ewibit]

I really hope the two of you could patch things up and work together more in the future.

+1

[SolarSilver]

Did a business seriously start a public thread just to taunt the (volunteer) developer of their software platform? With friends like these, who needs enemies...

Actually the original posts were placed in the thread "Announcement - ASIC mining processor by Butterfly Labs" as a reply to this message:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=87934.msg1511889#msg1511889

and some friendly forum mod moved them (right so) to their own thread. So things are a bit out of context

(It's amazing the amount of mudslinging that goes on between the believers and disbelievers of the different vendors, and now even the people in charge... shees what a bunch of wasted energy that could have been spent answering your own customers questions and request)

I hope Yifu must be traveling the red eye flight back to China to spend some obligatory quality time with family and had some time to kill in the waiting area...

[PuertoLibre]

Feb-2

Hey Josh,
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?

Are you starting a whole thread just to start a fight with Kano?

Fuck off you loser.

you should get down on your knees and suck the man off for the software development he has done for the bitcoin community.

You just told off a moderator. It was a moderator who did that.

[PuertoLibre]

Did a business seriously start a public thread just to taunt the (volunteer) developer of their software platform? With friends like these, who needs enemies...

Summary of events:
1) Avalon wants miner software, decides cgminer is a good platform and decides to use it (OK)
2) cgminer's developer asks for hardware so he can properly include it in cgminer (OK)
3) Avalon declines the offer (OK) and finds someone else to code it (OK)
4) Avalon shipped devices with binary code (OK)
5) The cgminer developer requests source code via 6b of GPL-v3. (OK) [EDIT: kano might not have rights to request the code, only those that received the binaries may. If, however, someone emails kano the binary - he may then request the source from the intermediary who must request it from Avalon]
6) Avalon has 30 days to remedy the situation (section 8 GPL-v3, OK)
7) Avalon drags feet as to not give a competitive advantage to competitors (OK), cites "technical" reasons but it doesn't matter, they can just drag their feet.

Why taunt Kano? Fulfill the request (or be liable to legal action) and take care of customers - what's the point of this thread?

Again, a low count poster who didn't follow along and realized that the moderator did a thread split.

Is the 30days from someone who recieved the binary and makes the request?

Or is the 30 days applicable from the day of releasing the binary to someone who doesn't have a right to ask for the source code. (not even a customer, did not receive the binary, ?therefore can't make it a request on legitimate grounds?)

When does the clock start running and what is the basis at which it starts the 30 day limit?

I actually do not know, that is why I am asking.

[PuertoLibre]

Yeah, that's a GPL-v2 thing, not v3. Only those that actually receive the binary code can request it.

Your summery is pretty accurate, except for the fact that Kano can't request the source code, as he's not a customer, and I believe a Mod split this thread out of another one. I do love how they use cgminer software, and then bitch at a CGMiner dev for getting involved. Really?  

Nevermind, it was answered previously.

[DobZombie]

You just told off a moderator. It was a moderator who did that.
[/quote]

I see, this came from the BFL thread.  That's just a fkn bad! I wish the mods would make a note at the start of the thread when they do that.

That would be like bill gates walking into apple headquarters and start yelling at Mark Zuckerberg!

o.0

[kano]

I really hope the two of you could patch things up and work together more in the future.

+1

As I've said, it doesn't matter ... and I guess that is a big part of the whole misunderstanding ...
Xiangfu can support it, or even get ckolivas himself to support it.

Having the hardware is necessary to do proper support.

By support I mean: advancing the code, fixing bugs and answering questions.
... just like I do with the Icarus code ... and the MMQ and BFL FPGA code ... coz I have all 3.
... and I don't do with the ztex code, coz I don't have one ...
Xiangfu will have an Avalon soon, but I'd certainly go as far as suggesting that giving ckolivas one and thus getting his support would be even better for Avalon and it's customers.
(and I will repeat again what I said ... I don't want one)

The ASIC software environment will be very interesting ...
ckolivas has never had any FPGAs so he has, to a large extent, stayed away from most of the FPGA driver code.
He has of course done most of the changes not directly part of the FPGA driver code, to the main cgminer code that all devices use.
He also did the one change to the BFL FPGA code that was the biggest performance gain since it was first written
(I had earlier done the equivalent change to the Icarus code)
As I have said quite a few times and also for a very long time, the initial choice for the FPGA code of serial-USB was problematic and in general a bad choice.
I finally got around to doing something about that at the end of last year by rewriting the serial-USB part and using direct USB, that all future USB code will be using by whoever writes the drivers (I've also converted both the MMQ and the BFL FPGA code over to it)

But regarding the GPL, as I've said from the beginning, the cgminer code already exists and according to Avalon, existed complete on the 20th Jan.
There will not be any ground breaking code in there. I can tell you up front.
ckolivas is now working on the main change to cgminer itself for ASIC, handling devices with MCU queues
I believe Xiangfu did a somewhat related change to support sending ~24 items to the Avalon all at once, but having ckolivas do it in the main code (as I wanted it done) and then having an ASIC use all the new USB code will be very interesting indeed, most so also due to the fact that ckolivas himself will be completely involved with the direct ASIC code due to having ASIC devices.

I am indeed looking forward to what happens with cgminer with this new code and both of us working on it
... and of course anyone else who fonts up and provides good quality code and ongoing support for whatever other devices we don't have the hardware for.

[kano]

You just told off a moderator. It was a moderator who did that.

I see, this came from the BFL thread.  That's just a fkn bad! I wish the mods would make a note at the start of the thread when they do that.

That would be like bill gates walking into apple headquarters and start yelling at Mark Zuckerberg!

o.0

Yeah when it was all moved over to this thread I was looking to see who did it.
Of course I've no problem with the fact it was done, but it would be reasonable for the mod to say they actually did it by editing the first post (or adding a post when they did the break explaining that)

[maqifrnswa]

Is the 30days from someone who recieved the binary and makes the request?

Or is the 30 days applicable from the day of releasing the binary to someone who doesn't have a right to ask for the source code. (not even a customer, did not receive the binary, ?therefore can't make it a request on legitimate grounds?)

When does the clock start running and what is the basis at which it starts the 30 day limit?

I actually do not know, that is why I am asking.

Well, technically, there is no 30 days. If a customer requests code, and you do not provide it, you are immediately in violation. Technically you're supposed to stop distributing immediately and are liable to legal action if you continue. At this point two things can happen:

1) you "fix" it and start distributing source code. After 60 days of "good" behaviour, the violation evaporates and you have the full license to distribute again.
2) you don't fix it, and a cgminer dev tells you you are in violation. The cgminer dev does not need to receive the software, but only needs to have evidence that one of your customers was denied access to the source code. At this point you have 30 days to fix it, if you do you get your full license back automatically.
3) cgminer devs can just tell you that your license is terminated, due to the violation, and you must cease distributing the software in binary form.

(see section 8 of GPL)

GPL disputes are best handled politely and in good faith, not with the copyright holder going after the fork with guns blazing and the fork going into a legal turtle shell. So there is language regarding 30 days to "cure the violation," but you really shouldn't be using it like a clock.

[Syke]

It would be so much easier if companies would just release the source when they release binaries.

Bitsyncom, post the source. Now.

[Icoin]

It would be so much easier if companies would just release the source when they release binaries.

Bitsyncom, post the source. Now.

I never had a problem with the source of Lancelot, it arrived with the hardware on a USB stick. Since Jeff and the Bitcoin Foundation allready has a Avalon device i assume they have the source.

No worries the release of Icarus was a mess too, but in the end it worked
We all gonna have soon the pleasure of many different ASICs, so i realy see no reason for hot minds.

[nathanrees19]

Well, I officially called it, but I honestly thought "weeks" would be an exaggeration at the time.

[DoomDumas]

orders are not opened while we solve the ordering issues existing previously so no orders are opened at the moment.

After trying to ream Kano a new asshole, the able is all that was offered up to Avalon's clients. Totally amazing!

Even worst : Batch 2 order was made trough WalletBit.. who suck 0.89% fee on a BTC deposit in a customer's wallet !
Speculation : Avalon may have made a deal with them.. afaik chinese-like-business-practice !!

[DoomDumas]

It would be so much easier if companies would just release the source when they release binaries.

Bitsyncom, post the source. Now.

Do they really care ? 

[myrond]

It would be so much easier if companies would just release the source when they release binaries.

Bitsyncom, post the source. Now.

From what I understand you actually have to have a binary...  do you know anybody who has the binary?  Perhaps the demand should come from that person instead.

I don't see why they have to redistribute anything, if the hardware hasn't been delivered.  It might even be shipped with the unit... who knows!

Demanding stuff seems so wrong;  especially after everything they have done for the bitcoin community.  Trying to get a open platform to market.  Not trying to take advantage of their skill set in bringing it to fruition just for themselves, instead allowing the boxes to be distributed far and wide to build the foundation of the network.

All of these complaints, are they even customers of Avalon?

I ordered one box from Avalon; they said in the beginning it would be shipped/delivered by the end of February 2013.  They are currently (AFAIK) on schedule and yet they still get bashed constantly for everything.  Why?  They are on schedule.  They are delivering generally what they said they would deliver.  They will arrive when they arrive (I'm sure source was well).  It is a little early to start demanding source before distribution of binaries is it not?

When I purchased the one box I thought they would be shipping MONTHs after everyone.  But I liked the idea and the plan behind building the boxes so I put my BTC's where my mouth was.

If you look at what ngzhang has committed to the open source community, if you look at his youtube videos... from what I can see is a company/organization that is actually making a difference, unlike some others that appears to be in it for (more) personal gain.

[nathanrees19]

I don't see why they have to redistribute anything
...
Trying to get a open platform to market.

An "open platform" is not one where you grudgingly comply with the GPL and take weeks and weeks to release source after shipping.

Here's a product line which is truly open:

https://www.olimex.com/Products/OLinuXino/

They have schematics and sources up for products that haven't even been released yet.

[PuertoLibre]

If you look at what ngzhang has committed to the open source community, if you look at his youtube videos... from what I can see is a company/organization that is actually making a difference, unlike some others that appears to be in it for (more) personal gain.

What is the link to his YouTube account?

[Syke]

From what I understand you actually have to have a binary...  do you know anybody who has the binary?  Perhaps the demand should come from that person instead.

I don't see why they have to redistribute anything, if the hardware hasn't been delivered.  It might even be shipped with the unit... who knows!

Let me quote their own announcement:

We shipped, website will be updated shortly.

First unit goes to Jeff Garzik in honor for the work he has done for the bitcoin codebase being the only developer who ordered from us.

Yes, they shipped binaries 20 days ago, and have yet to release the source code for it. That is in clear violation of the license.

- source code will release 30 days to comply to an infringement notice from a copyright holder.

Furthermore, they are well aware that they are in violation of the license, yet they are chosing not to comply.

[PuertoLibre]

From what I understand you actually have to have a binary...  do you know anybody who has the binary?  Perhaps the demand should come from that person instead.

I don't see why they have to redistribute anything, if the hardware hasn't been delivered.  It might even be shipped with the unit... who knows!

Let me quote their own announcement:

We shipped, website will be updated shortly.

First unit goes to Jeff Garzik in honor for the work he has done for the bitcoin codebase being the only developer who ordered from us.

Yes, they shipped binaries 20 days ago, and have yet to release the source code for it. That is in clear violation of the license.

- source code will release 30 days to comply to an infringement notice from a copyright holder.

Furthermore, they are well aware that they are in violation of the license, yet they are chosing not to comply.

Keep in mind Jeff actually has to ask for them to be in violation of it.

In either case, it will be resolved over the weekend per Yifu's statements.

[xempew]

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.

[Keninishna]

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.

Was wondering who won lol.

[Syke]

Keep in mind Jeff actually has to ask for them to be in violation of it.

Actually, no. Unless they included the source code (they didn't), or included a written offer on how to obtain the source code (I've seen no reports of such), then they are already in violation.

[wknight]

Its funny.. many people asking for source wont even be able to know how to read it.. they are just jumping on the bandwagon. Kano will have no trouble looking through the code I am sure. In 30 days in which he said he would supply it we will see.. until then its a mute point

[jgarzik]

The spectacle of watching laymen giving themselves a promotion to copyright attorney is truly worth watching.

[mezzomix]

I dont' know if this question was already answered. Jeff, did you ask Avalon to provide you the source code?

[jgarzik]

I dont' know if this question was already answered. Jeff, did you ask Avalon to provide you the source code?

Not yet, no.

Yifu stated the source would be released, even before kano began his transparent quest for free hardware.  No reason to disbelieve that, at this time.

[kano]

I dont' know if this question was already answered. Jeff, did you ask Avalon to provide you the source code?

Not yet, no.

Yifu stated the source would be released, even before kano began his transparent quest for free hardware.  No reason to disbelieve that, at this time.

Fuck off and learn to read.

Mean while - yes that quite clearly shows where he stands with Open Source code.
The code was available the day the device shipped but you don't give a damn about getting them to release that software.
Not in your area of interest.
What goes around comes around.
I guess as I mentioned before it was a waste of my time even attempting to help 'you'.

[Vicus]

I dont' know if this question was already answered. Jeff, did you ask Avalon to provide you the source code?

Not yet, no.

Yifu stated the source would be released, even before kano began his transparent quest for free hardware.  No reason to disbelieve that, at this time.

Fuck off and learn to read.

Mean while - yes that quite clearly shows where he stands with Open Source code.
The code was available the day the device shipped but you don't give a damn about getting them to release that software.
Not in your area of interest.
What goes around comes around.
I guess as I mentioned before it was a waste of my time even attempting to help 'you'.

Poor poor kano, evil Avalon don't want to give free ASIC

[bce]

Maybe jgarzik is kinda out of touch with the mining side of things, and with the role which kano has played in maintaining and improving cgminer for us all?  Kano is not after free hardware, but rather to make the hardware free to do a better job.  Kano needs the hardware in order to do this, or at least share the freakin' code so that when jgarzik reports _____, kano can do some guess work and try for a solution.  

Fill in the blank:
Avalon chose cgminer because ___________.

Remember, only 2 avalon units exist, to date.

[jgarzik]

Maybe jgarzik is kinda out of touch with the mining side of things, and with the role which kano has played in maintaining and improving cgminer for us all?  Kano is not after free hardware,

Where oh where did cgminer come from, originally?  hmmm.

[bce]

Where oh where did cgminer come from, originally?  hmmm.

Mr. Garzik, Thanks for the link - this explains much of the drama.  It seems to me that you two are both the proud parents and or grandparents of a baby called cgminer, and as any parent / grandparent would, you want to protect your baby.  With every fork, the baby grows into something new !  You should both be supportive of fostering its development and be willing to let it to grow with new devices as best as it can.  Avalon crashes, and I believe the fork of cgminer it is using is from kano's foster home, right?  Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you two both seem to want the same thing- you want cgminer and avalon to work correctly.

[kano]

Maybe jgarzik is kinda out of touch with the mining side of things, and with the role which kano has played in maintaining and improving cgminer for us all?  Kano is not after free hardware,

Where oh where did cgminer come from, originally?  hmmm.

... and the only numerical proof you have of the fact that you are mining is the code I wrote.

If you want to inflate your ego with your aggrandizement about the origins of cgminer you are arguing with ckolivas, not me.
His git is what I support, his code is the majority of what is in the main core of cgminer now.
A lot of the antique cpuminer guff has been rewritten ... coz it needed it.

I guess we could even compare that to the origins of the FPGA code.
As is well know Luke-Jr wrote the first FPGA driver in cgminer.
Most of that too has been rewritten ... coz it needed it.

Most things I've worked on with cgminer have been to add things that weren't even in (were missing from) the antique cpuminer.

[mrb]

Where oh where did cgminer come from, originally?  hmmm.

... and the only numerical proof you have of the fact that you are mining is the code I wrote.

If you want to inflate your ego with your aggrandizement about the origins of cgminer [...]

...says the guy who is constantly arguing with Luke-jr about the origins of the FPGA mining code in bfgminer/cgminer, who forked who, who rewrote what, blah blah blah  

A case of the pot calling the kettle black.

[-ck]

Meh I'm not getting involved. Even as a flamewar this got derailed to the point where I'm not even sure who's debating what 

[greyhawk]

Nice e-drama and stuff.

Here's the more important question though.

Is that kano himself posing with that katana in his avatar or is that another random weeaboo?

[Bicknellski]

The spectacle of watching laymen giving themselves a promotion to copyright attorney is truly worth watching.

+1

[kano]

Nice e-drama and stuff.

Here's the more important question though.

Is that kano himself posing with that katana in his avatar or is that another random weeaboo?

Yes, but it's not a katana
It's an antique sword used in the Boer Wars
But the only thing antique about it is it's age - it is indeed still a potent weapon.

Edit: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112543.msg1511807#msg1511807

[nathanrees19]

even before kano began his transparent quest for free hardware

Jesus fuck. I actually thought at the time that shipping one of their two units to you was a good thing. I hate being proven wrong.

[nathanrees19]

Maybe jgarzik is kinda out of touch with the mining side of things, and with the role which kano has played in maintaining and improving cgminer for us all?  Kano is not after free hardware,

Where oh where did cgminer come from, originally?  hmmm.

Nobody fucking cares about getwork/cpu mining anymore. cpuminer is a toy for people who want to lol at their linksys router mining at 20khash. considering how much has been rewritten/replaced with something less shitty, cgminer might as well have been forked from windows 98.

[greyhawk]

Nice e-drama and stuff.

Here's the more important question though.

Is that kano himself posing with that katana in his avatar or is that another random weeaboo?

Yes, but it's not a katana
It's an antique sword used in the Boer Wars
But the only thing antique about it is it's age - it is indeed still a potent weapon.

Edit: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112543.msg1511807#msg1511807

Ah, I see now it actually ends where the picture ends. No katana indeed. I DID think the handguard looked very unjapanese. We need a weapon porn thread.

[allinvain]

[2112]

The spectacle of watching laymen giving themselves a promotion to copyright attorney is truly worth watching.

This is minor leagues kind of fun.

The real fun would (or will) start when the people involved could afford a real legal counsel. Imagine what would happen if a successfull preliminary injunction would get filled against importing Avalon units into USA. That would be like real fireworks.

Obviously I'm very curious what is in the unreleased source code in the Avalon driver. Fan-speed control is probably nearly open-source. But the voltage regulator programming and clock synthesizer programming may hide real secret information. Even if the code gets released the people involved may regret the ultimate results of the disclosure.

I understand that Avalon simply had no time to develop a proper firmware layer to isolate themselves from the results of adverse disclosure. They may be just another project snuffed by the situation where GPLv3 turns virulent and kills the host.

Anyone here has any constructive suggestions how to make the hardware driver detail disclosure non-adverse? Some sort of obfuscation scheme with programming a multitude of non-existent regsters with multiple pages full of hex values? Is there a quick way to distinguish which registers are real and which are fake?

[jgarzik]

Obviously I'm very curious what is in the unreleased source code in the Avalon driver. Fan-speed control is probably nearly open-source. But the voltage regulator programming and clock synthesizer programming may hide real secret information. Even if the code gets released the people involved may regret the ultimate results of the disclosure.

I understand that Avalon simply had no time to develop a proper firmware layer to isolate themselves from the results of adverse disclosure. They may be just another project snuffed by the situation where GPLv3 turns virulent and kills the host.

The kernel stuff is GPLv2.  Only cgminer is GPLv3, AFAICT.  Definitely a difference there, and there is plenty of de facto precedent for binary-only gadgets in the kernel -- even if hardcore Debian-legal denizens disagree with that legal interpretation/result.

Anyone here has any constructive suggestions how to make the hardware driver detail disclosure non-adverse? Some sort of obfuscation scheme with programming a multitude of non-existent regsters with multiple pages full of hex values? Is there a quick way to distinguish which registers are real and which are fake?

There are any number of existing bytecode solutions that could be employed, to provide a sort of "firmware" that is executed by the host CPU.  Modern ACPI functions like this, as does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Firmware

Of course, that tends not to be performance-heavy code, but instead critical bootstrapping and initialization functions.

[2112]

The kernel stuff is GPLv2.  Only cgminer is GPLv3, AFAICT.  Definitely a difference there, and there is plenty of de facto precedent for binary-only gadgets in the kernel -- even if hardcore Debian-legal denizens disagree with that legal interpretation/result.

Well, I'm thinking that Avalon people didn't have time to write a proper firmware and device driver. They are probably using the generic drivers from the Linux kernel. Then all the initialization/control/stabilization code is in the modified cgminer, which is all GPLv3. Avalon probably heavily modified the AMD/ATI fan control code from the GPU miner and USB-interface code from the FPGA miner.

There are any number of existing bytecode solutions that could be employed, to provide a sort of "firmware" that is executed by the host CPU.  Modern ACPI functions like this, as does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Firmware

Of course, that tends not to be performance-heavy code, but instead critical bootstrapping and initialization functions.

The easiest it would be if only fan-control is used after initialization and voltage and frequency settings are hard-coded in the factory. But if they have the fully dynamic clocking like eldentyrell does in his tricone FPGA miner then it would be nearly impossible to split all that functionality into a binary blob or whatever else.

ACPI folks had years of experience with their technology and build up on the past experience with PnP etc. And even they still freqently can't get it right.

[kjj]

I understand that Avalon simply had no time to develop a proper firmware layer to isolate themselves from the results of adverse disclosure. They may be just another project snuffed by the situation where GPLv3 turns virulent and kills the host.

Bullshit.  There are no secrets here.  SHA is totally known.  Bitcoin mining is totally known.  USB is totally known.  There is absolutely fucking nothing in an Avalon unit to be protected by secrecy.  The hard part here is actually making the damn chip, not the LOL-programming they use in the FPGA that manages them.

Moreover, your notion of GPL "turning virulent" and killing the host is bullshit too.  If they didn't like the conditions, they didn't have to use any of it.  Not releasing their changes is just shitting on the community, and as I mentioned before, pointless.

[jgarzik]

If they didn't like the conditions, they didn't have to use any of it.  Not releasing their changes is just shitting on the community, and as I mentioned before, pointless.

That would only be true if Avalon said they will not release source code; but they have always maintained that they will release source code.  At least that's what I was told.

Based on that, the only question is the date of release, and by extension, the patience level of forum posters

[2112]

I understand that Avalon simply had no time to develop a proper firmware layer to isolate themselves from the results of adverse disclosure. They may be just another project snuffed by the situation where GPLv3 turns virulent and kills the host.

Bullshit.  There are no secrets here.  SHA is totally known.  Bitcoin mining is totally known.  USB is totally known.  There is absolutely fucking nothing in an Avalon unit to be protected by secrecy.  The hard part here is actually making the damn chip, not the LOL-programming they use in the FPGA that manages them.

Moreover, your notion of GPL "turning virulent" and killing the host is bullshit too.  If they didn't like the conditions, they didn't have to use any of it.  Not releasing their changes is just shitting on the community, and as I mentioned before, pointless.

I'm just quoting for posterity. This is a perfect example of a supporter that is worse than an enemy. Not understanding hardware is not a problem. Not understanding hardware and pretending to understand it is the most serious problem: for example the overclockability curve can be used to estimate manuafacturing yields.

Involvement of the people like kjj is the reason why so many hardware-related open source projects fail: they inadvertently disclose all the competitive information because they simply don't understand the manufacturing technology and planning: front-loaded NRE costs rule. The competition can run circles around them: a knowledgeable competitor using proper analytics would know more about their manufacturing than the ostensible project managers do.

This isn't a software business with no barrier to entry and where the costs are back-end loaded: mostly in the maintenance. Even if you don't understand this now, just copy this and paste it somewhere for the future reference. There is also a lot of similar discussion from they days where various people from around Linux Torvalds discussed merits and demerits of various licenses. In Bitcoin you have all that distilled to just a handfull of projects.

[kjj]

If they didn't like the conditions, they didn't have to use any of it.  Not releasing their changes is just shitting on the community, and as I mentioned before, pointless.

That would only be true if Avalon said they will not release source code; but they have always maintained that they will release source code.  At least that's what I was told.

Based on that, the only question is the date of release, and by extension, the patience level of forum posters

They were in violation of international copyright treaties the moment they shipped.  The GPL doesn't say that you must intend in the future to release the source code, it says that the physical product must be accompanied by either the source code or a written offer to provide the source code.

By default, there is no right of distribution.  They only way to get that right is through a license.  The GPL provides an automatic license to people that comply with the terms described.  Failure to comply with those terms = copyright violation and termination of license.  Section 8 provides ways to restore the license, but it does not excuse a violation and does not give a grace period during which violations are acceptable.

At any rate, I don't really care much about violations.  I had two points, the first being that 2112's notion that the GPL is an evil thing, strangling poor projects in their crib is nonsense, and the second that there was not, is not, and never will be, a good reason for Avalon to have failed to provide the software alongside the physical product.

[2112]

If they didn't like the conditions, they didn't have to use any of it.  Not releasing their changes is just shitting on the community, and as I mentioned before, pointless.

That would only be true if Avalon said they will not release source code; but they have always maintained that they will release source code.  At least that's what I was told.

Based on that, the only question is the date of release, and by extension, the patience level of forum posters

They were in violation of international copyright treaties the moment they shipped.  The GPL doesn't say that you must intend in the future to release the source code, it says that the physical product must be accompanied by either the source code or a written offer to provide the source code.

By default, there is no right of distribution.  They only way to get that right is through a license.  The GPL provides an automatic license to people that comply with the terms described.  Failure to comply with those terms = copyright violation and termination of license.  Section 8 provides ways to restore the license, but it does not excuse a violation and does not give a grace period during which violations are acceptable.

At any rate, I don't really care much about violations.  I had two points, the first being that 2112's notion that the GPL is an evil thing, strangling poor projects in their crib is nonsense, and the second that there was not, is not, and never will be, a good reason for Avalon to have failed to provide the software alongside the physical product.

Again, I'm just quoting for future reference because this board allows ulimited message editing/deletion.

This is an example of how defense of international software copyright treaties kills competition in hardware business preventing the startups from recouping the NRE costs.

The biggest enemy of Bitcoin aren't banksters or whatever else powers-that-be. The enemies are the hormone-laden cholerics that simply cannot think on the horizon longer than a month or (rarely) year.

[kjj]

I understand that Avalon simply had no time to develop a proper firmware layer to isolate themselves from the results of adverse disclosure. They may be just another project snuffed by the situation where GPLv3 turns virulent and kills the host.

Bullshit.  There are no secrets here.  SHA is totally known.  Bitcoin mining is totally known.  USB is totally known.  There is absolutely fucking nothing in an Avalon unit to be protected by secrecy.  The hard part here is actually making the damn chip, not the LOL-programming they use in the FPGA that manages them.

Moreover, your notion of GPL "turning virulent" and killing the host is bullshit too.  If they didn't like the conditions, they didn't have to use any of it.  Not releasing their changes is just shitting on the community, and as I mentioned before, pointless.

I'm just quoting for posterity. This is a perfect example of a supporter that is worse than an enemy. Not understanding hardware is not a problem. Not understanding hardware and pretending to understand it is the most serious problem: for example the overclockability curve can be used to estimate manuafacturing yields.

Involvement of the people like kjj is the reason why so many hardware-related open source projects fail: they inadvertently disclose all the competitive information because they simply don't understand the manufacturing technology and planning: front-loaded NRE costs rule. The competition can run circles around them: a knowledgeable competitor using proper analytics would know more about their manufacturing than the ostensible project managers do.

This isn't a software business with no barrier to entry and where the costs are back-end loaded: mostly in the maintenance. Even if you don't understand this now, just copy this and paste it somewhere for the future reference. There is also a lot of similar discussion from they days where various people from around Linux Torvalds discussed merits and demerits of various licenses. In Bitcoin you have all that distilled to just a handfull of projects.

Oh dear god, not the manufacturing yield!  Anything but the manufacturing yield!

Seriously dude, get a grip.  The mining programs already spew FPGA bitstreams as opaque blobs provided by the manufacturer.  If the Avalon is using an FPGA for management, that blob is either on a ROM chip on the board, or in the filesystem of the control board.  No one cares.  What we do care about is knowing what they did to cgminer (GPL!) so that it could talk to the management module.  Plenty of us want to throw out the crappy wifi router they are using and connect our units, when we get them, into our existing infrastructure.

If there are big secrets in the patches they made to cgminer, then they fail because now that they have distributed it, they are required to disclose those changes.  If they didn't like that, they should not have used that software.

[kjj]

If they didn't like the conditions, they didn't have to use any of it.  Not releasing their changes is just shitting on the community, and as I mentioned before, pointless.

That would only be true if Avalon said they will not release source code; but they have always maintained that they will release source code.  At least that's what I was told.

Based on that, the only question is the date of release, and by extension, the patience level of forum posters

They were in violation of international copyright treaties the moment they shipped.  The GPL doesn't say that you must intend in the future to release the source code, it says that the physical product must be accompanied by either the source code or a written offer to provide the source code.

By default, there is no right of distribution.  They only way to get that right is through a license.  The GPL provides an automatic license to people that comply with the terms described.  Failure to comply with those terms = copyright violation and termination of license.  Section 8 provides ways to restore the license, but it does not excuse a violation and does not give a grace period during which violations are acceptable.

At any rate, I don't really care much about violations.  I had two points, the first being that 2112's notion that the GPL is an evil thing, strangling poor projects in their crib is nonsense, and the second that there was not, is not, and never will be, a good reason for Avalon to have failed to provide the software alongside the physical product.

Again, I'm just quoting for future reference because this board allows ulimited message editing/deletion.

This is an example of how defense of international software copyright treaties kills competition in hardware business preventing the startups from recouping the NRE costs.

The biggest enemy of Bitcoin aren't banksters or whatever else powers-that-be. The enemies are the hormone-laden cholerics that simply cannot think on the horizon longer than a month or (rarely) year.

Why would I edit or delete my posts?  You are the insane one here, not me.  Heh, ok, calling you insane might be a bit over the top, so I may edit that to a nicer term later.

They used software that requires disclosure of changes.  No one forced them to use it.  They made the decision voluntarily.  They had the right to write their own software and keep it secret.  Hell, if they really wanted to, they could have tracked down all of the authors and negotiated a different license for the same software.

I'm no fan of copyright as applied to non-commercial distribution, or even merely copying, for that matter, but it is the world we live in.  And in this world, I support the rights of authors to game the system to preserve freedom, and I care a hell a lot more about that than I do about "competition in hardware business".  You are the one with the short thinking horizon here, not me.  You seem to care more about next year's products than about the next generation's freedom.

I think I've clarified my position on this sufficiently now.  The products/freedom issue is what divides the open source people from the Free Software people, and I think it should be plenty obvious which side both of us are on.

[2112]

Why would I edit or delete my posts?  You are the insane one here, not me.  Heh, ok, calling you insane might be a bit over the top, so I may edit that to a nicer term later.

They used software that requires disclosure of changes.  No one forced them to use it.  They made the decision voluntarily.  They had the right to write their own software and keep it secret.  Hell, if they really wanted to, they could have tracked down all of the authors and negotiated a different license for the same software.

I'm no fan of copyright as applied to non-commercial distribution, or even merely copying, for that matter, but it is the world we live in.  And in this world, I support the rights of authors to game the system to preserve freedom, and I care a hell a lot more about that than I do about "competition in hardware business".  You are the one with the short thinking horizon here, not me.  You seem to care more about next year's products than about the next generation's freedom.

I think I've clarified my position on this sufficiently now.  The products/freedom issue is what divides the open source people from the Free Software people, and I think it should be plenty obvious which side both of us are on.

Click & snap again.

I mean kjj is kinda lost-cause here, he isn't even aware that he's at a poker table and laying your cards for all to see is not a winning strategy. But I know that this board is read by many young people who are capable of learning.

Hardware development is like a poker: you keep your cards close to the chest, maybe drop some and add some, place your bets and wait for the showdown. If you show your cards to other players before showdown you are going to lose (or at least you aren't going to win anything). And if you lose all your stake you will not be allowed to sit at any table. If you wont be able to front the money for the cheapest table you'll be just a beggar waiting for handouts from the real players at the casino's entrance.

I'm not sure how much TSMC values the non-disclosure about the manufacturing node that Avalon used. But before they had their chips manufactured by TSMC they had to sign something about obeying reasonable care to avoid disclosing TSMC-proprietary and whoever-else-proprietary information. SHA-2 is an example of a self-testing structure, something akin to the test structures used in the manufacturing process testing and calibration.

When Avalon is going to disclose their voltage regulator and clock synthesizer programming information it will allow competent people to obtain very detailed information about TSMC process used. I don't think that theres much commercial value in that, but it is the intentions that count. Avalon signed not to disclose, but allowed disclosure through carelessness. TSMC aren't going to be thrilled about it and will drive harder bargain when Avalon tries to order the 2nd batch. I'm not expecting somebody from Chronicle Technology open the account to post "Thanks, suckers.", but maybe some of the Avalon competitors will do that.

So Avalon is now in between the hammer of GPLv3 and the anvil of NDA with TSMC.

This concludes this my short lecture. If you plan to ever in your life play in the high-stakes game of hardware development: learn the rules. Otherwise you'll be forever fighting over the table scraps and leftovers: like Raspberry Pi where Broadcom/Alphamosaic Videocore GPU boots and controls the ARM CPU sandbox to let the kids play with their open cards poker game.

[Evan]

Kano, you forgot to cite the hole in his code that steals 1/100000 hashs and sends it to his account so he can steal the equivalence of bit penny.....  Open Source or None at all

[eldentyrell]

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?

before kano began his transparent quest for free hardware.

I too have been really irritated by kano and his "I'm entitled to free stuff" attitude.

But it goes beyond mere irritation; when he doesn't get free stuff he actually makes up false accusations in order to get attention.  For example, he made the absurd claim that the TML host software was derived from cgminer.  Of course this is ridiculous, and all of the source code for the TML host software is publicly available, every single line of it.  And it's written in a completely different language for crying out loud.

I still haven't gotten an apology from him.

[kano]

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?

I too have been really irritated by kano and his "I'm entitled to free stuff" attitude.

But it goes beyond mere irritation; when he doesn't get free stuff he actually makes up false accusations in order to get attention.  For example, he made the absurd claim that the TML host software was derived from cgminer.  Of course this is ridiculous, and all of the source code for the TML host software is publicly available, every single line of it.  And it's written in a completely different language for crying out loud.

I still haven't gotten an apology from him.

Coz you are making an absurd claim that is false.

[Luke-Jr]

But it goes beyond mere irritation; when he doesn't get free stuff he actually makes up false accusations in order to get attention.

Wow, phrased this way it sounds an awful lot like ckolivas too.

[nbtcminer]

Kano, you forgot to cite the hole in his code that steals 1/100000 hashs and sends it to his account so he can steal the equivalence of bit penny.....  Open Source or None at all

... No FUD please.

[Monster Tent]

Avalon customer service now brought to you by Inaba.

[Unacceptable]

Avalon customer service now brought to you by Inaba.

At least Inaba posts SOMETHING    Even if it's a troll feed or delay 

I haven't heard about a tracking # or shipping update from Avalon for a few weeks now 

[The-Real-Link]

2112's post sounded awfully cryptic but I suppose that's why companies strongly protect their trade, production, etc., and have lawyers.

Well, aside from all the FUD in this thread, it just sounds like Avalon has to do the right thing(s); that's up to them and no one else.  Hope it helps making mine with their units better.

[Syke]

They were in violation of international copyright treaties the moment they shipped.  The GPL doesn't say that you must intend in the future to release the source code, it says that the physical product must be accompanied by either the source code or a written offer to provide the source code.

By default, there is no right of distribution.  They only way to get that right is through a license.  The GPL provides an automatic license to people that comply with the terms described.  Failure to comply with those terms = copyright violation and termination of license.  Section 8 provides ways to restore the license, but it does not excuse a violation and does not give a grace period during which violations are acceptable.

At any rate, I don't really care much about violations.  I had two points, the first being that 2112's notion that the GPL is an evil thing, strangling poor projects in their crib is nonsense, and the second that there was not, is not, and never will be, a good reason for Avalon to have failed to provide the software alongside the physical product.

This is an example of how defense of international software copyright treaties kills competition in hardware business preventing the startups from recouping the NRE costs.

The biggest enemy of Bitcoin aren't banksters or whatever else powers-that-be. The enemies are the hormone-laden cholerics that simply cannot think on the horizon longer than a month or (rarely) year.

Are you actually complaining about the GPL license? kjj is absolutely correct. Avalon took GPL source, modified it, and failed to offer the source. That is a violation, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if they promised to release it later. It doesn't matter if they are giving up trade secrets to release it. If they don't like the terms of the GPL, they shouldn't have used GPL source. But they did use GPL source, and they have violated the license.

[Vicus]

Are you actually complaining about the GPL license? kjj is absolutely correct. Avalon took GPL source, modified it, and failed to offer the source. That is a violation, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if they promised to release it later. It doesn't matter if they are giving up trade secrets to release it. If they don't like the terms of the GPL, they shouldn't have used GPL source. But they did use GPL source, and they have violated the license.

bla-bla-bla
In Russia we have good proverb for that situation: "The dogs bark, but the caravan goes on".

[Raoul Duke]

Are you actually complaining about the GPL license? kjj is absolutely correct. Avalon took GPL source, modified it, and failed to offer the source. That is a violation, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if they promised to release it later. It doesn't matter if they are giving up trade secrets to release it. If they don't like the terms of the GPL, they shouldn't have used GPL source. But they did use GPL source, and they have violated the license.

bla-bla-bla
In Russia we have good proverb for that situation: "The dogs bark, but the caravan goes on".

Not only in Russia. In Portugal we also have that proverb, literally.

[2112]

Are you actually complaining about the GPL license? kjj is absolutely correct. Avalon took GPL source, modified it, and failed to offer the source. That is a violation, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if they promised to release it later. It doesn't matter if they are giving up trade secrets to release it. If they don't like the terms of the GPL, they shouldn't have used GPL source. But they did use GPL source, and they have violated the license.

What I'm pointing out is that kjj is preaching from the Free Software Foundation bible in the church of Hardware.

The actions that make sense in software business are frequently suicidal in the hardware business. This is because of the cost structure: hardware is mostly front-end-loaded, whereas software is mostly back-end-loaded.

Yes, Avalon made a mistake by using a code requiring GPLv3 compliance. They should've designed a separation layer like many hardware vendors that support Linux. But the Avalon team is young and inexperienced and they didn't design for that.

My position is that rational supporters of Bitcoin would attempt to come up with some middle-of-the-road solution to safeguard the existence of viable competition of multiple vendors in the Bitcoin ASIC business. What I see is almost exact opposite: they are asking Avalon to nearly commit suicide for the sake of an ilusory freedom. Ilusory, because for the gain of few pages of source the whole Bitcoin ecosystem is paying the price of severely disadvantaging one of the ASIC vendors, to the point that in the next iteration we could have a monopoly.

The rational behaviour would be probably along several possible lines:

a) disclose the code only to Jeff Garzik. He's professionally involved in Linux kernel development and may be able to offer some useful advice on how to both comply with GPLv3 and TSMC/whoever-else NDAs.

b) offer to escrow the code with Bitcoin Foundation and have a programmer at B.F. to produce an obfuscated code that complies both with GPLv3 and NDAs. There are already multiple precedents in escrowing the information with Gavin Andresen, but thus far the escrow was security-related.

c) I personally think that the "binary blob" workaround isn't viable here for purely technical reasons. But I may be wrong. Maybe somebody willing and able to sign the NDA could help Avalon to develop such a solution.

d) take a chill pill and make Avalon folks pinky swar that they disclose the required information after the competition shipped and after the subsequent batches are locked in with TSMC.

But this thread isn't about being rational. It is about militancy, a very short-sighted militancy of playing open-face chinese-rules poker at the traditional-rules poker table.

Think for a moment: What would Richard Stallman do if he had a single tapeout to his name before he received his MacArthur Fellowship? We wouldn't have a Free Software Foundation. We would have maybe a Free Logic Foundation or Free Computation Foundation or something else. But I believe that we would be better off: maybe we could have open-source processors and disk drives in our open-source computers.

[Vicus]

In Soviet Russia, ASIC mines you!
(Sorry, couldn't help myself with the family guy reference)

I expected this would be first reply... Missed, it was second  

[2112]

IMHO the best proverb to describe this thread is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face

[kano]

IMHO the best proverb to describe this thread is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face

No, this thread is about the GPL license requirements of cgminer.
It's not about some random person (you) idea about how that fits in with their thoughts on GPL and hardware.

GitSyncom has stated (for the 3rd time ... this time with a date that either just expired or is yet another week away) that they will release the source.

The issue why I brought this argument up was actually mainly due to the bogus excuse as to why they hadn't yet released it.
They supposedly completed 2 Avalon's on the 20th of Jan that contain the results of all of their different source code.
They have supposedly since then been making 12 Avalon a day (each with binaries made from that source code) and yet the bogus excuse was that they needed to remove something from it before they could release it.
Of course there are 2 issues: 1) They can't do that with cgminer and keep to the required licence 2) If they are referring to the non-cgminer code, then well that just means they've now made and shipped over 200 Avalons that have this so called problematic debugging code that is required to be removed - unless the "12 Avalons a day" was bogus.

I can tell you up front:
The cgminer code will be using the FPGA serial-USB library.
The cgminer code will have modified the scanhash is some manner to acquire ~24 work items at a time (instead of 1) coz the Avalon requires a group of items sent to it at a time ... no big deal ... and it's not ground breaking coz it's not even a queue as per discussion about improving performance.
Neither of those are any sort of advancement on cgminer, the first is something I've been removing from cgminer, the 2nd is something that is being developed properly now for the BFL SC's if they appear soon and use it in an optimal way ... as a queue.
The other changes they may have made in cgminer will not be ground breaking in any manner or form.
i.e. there really is no excuse to not have already released the cgminer code by a company who promotes themselves as Open Source to the Bitcoin community.
The results of that are that if anyone else does get an Avalon (which is still questionable more than 3 weeks after they shipped the first one) they are unable to deal with any cgminer problems themselves - and also an already known memory problem cannot be implemented by anyone who gets an Avalon, until the source code is released, without having to reinvent the code (which would also normally be done if any of the devs actually had the hardware ... though I'll be the one to help Xiangfu to do that ... if he does get an Avalon)

[Vicus]

which would also normally be done if any of the devs actually had the hardware

You're like a broken record... Change it.

[mobodick]

My position is that rational supporters of Bitcoin would attempt to come up with some middle-of-the-road solution to safeguard the existence of viable competition of multiple vendors in the Bitcoin ASIC business. What I see is almost exact opposite: they are asking Avalon to nearly commit suicide for the sake of an ilusory freedom. Ilusory, because for the gain of few pages of source the whole Bitcoin ecosystem is paying the price of severely disadvantaging one of the ASIC vendors, to the point that in the next iteration we could have a monopoly.

Why would you assume that releasing the source would disadvantage avalon?
What about the modifications is so special yet generic enough it can be applied to a competing product?
You talk about rational people but i have seen little ratio at times from the asic companies themselfs.
How can you rationally manage such irrational behaviour?
And how the hell can you call your pathetic "they are asking Avalon to nearly commit suicide for the sake of an ilusory freedom boo hoo leave britney avalon alone" bullshit anything resembling rational? lol

[nathanrees19]

I mean kjj is kinda lost-cause here, he isn't even aware that he's at a poker table and laying your cards for all to see is not a winning strategy.

Yeah, how dare he request that they release the mask sets for their ASICs. At least ask for something more reasonable like the GPL'ed mining software.

[Monster Tent]

IMHO the best proverb to describe this thread is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face

No, this thread is about the GPL license requirements of cgminer.
It's not about some random person (you) idea about how that fits in with their thoughts on GPL and hardware.

GitSyncom has stated (for the 3rd time ... this time with a date that either just expired or is yet another week away) that they will release the source.

The issue why I brought this argument up was actually mainly due to the bogus excuse as to why they hadn't yet released it.
They supposedly completed 2 Avalon's on the 20th of Jan that contain the results of all of their different source code.
They have supposedly since then been making 12 Avalon a day (each with binaries made from that source code) and yet the bogus excuse was that they needed to remove something from it before they could release it.
Of course there are 2 issues: 1) They can't do that with cgminer and keep to the required licence 2) If they are referring to the non-cgminer code, then well that just means they've now made and shipped over 200 Avalons that have this so called problematic debugging code that is required to be removed - unless the "12 Avalons a day" was bogus.

I can tell you up front:
The cgminer code will be using the FPGA serial-USB library.
The cgminer code will have modified the scanhash is some manner to acquire ~24 work items at a time (instead of 1) coz the Avalon requires a group of items sent to it at a time ... no big deal ... and it's not ground breaking coz it's not even a queue as per discussion about improving performance.
Neither of those are any sort of advancement on cgminer, the first is something I've been removing from cgminer, the 2nd is something that is being developed properly now for the BFL SC's if they appear soon and use it in an optimal way ... as a queue.
The other changes they may have made in cgminer will not be ground breaking in any manner or form.
i.e. there really is no excuse to not have already released the cgminer code by a company who promotes themselves as Open Source to the Bitcoin community.
The results of that are that if anyone else does get an Avalon (which is still questionable more than 3 weeks after they shipped the first one) they are unable to deal with any cgminer problems themselves - and also an already known memory problem cannot be implemented by anyone who gets an Avalon, until the source code is released, without having to reinvent the code (which would also normally be done if any of the devs actually had the hardware ... though I'll be the one to help Xiangfu to do that ... if he does get an Avalon)

I dont think the GPL license says anything about getting free hardware because you commit some code.

[kano]

IMHO the best proverb to describe this thread is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face

No, this thread is about the GPL license requirements of cgminer.
It's not about some random person (you) idea about how that fits in with their thoughts on GPL and hardware.

GitSyncom has stated (for the 3rd time ... this time with a date that either just expired or is yet another week away) that they will release the source.

The issue why I brought this argument up was actually mainly due to the bogus excuse as to why they hadn't yet released it.
They supposedly completed 2 Avalon's on the 20th of Jan that contain the results of all of their different source code.
They have supposedly since then been making 12 Avalon a day (each with binaries made from that source code) and yet the bogus excuse was that they needed to remove something from it before they could release it.
Of course there are 2 issues: 1) They can't do that with cgminer and keep to the required licence 2) If they are referring to the non-cgminer code, then well that just means they've now made and shipped over 200 Avalons that have this so called problematic debugging code that is required to be removed - unless the "12 Avalons a day" was bogus.

I can tell you up front:
The cgminer code will be using the FPGA serial-USB library.
The cgminer code will have modified the scanhash is some manner to acquire ~24 work items at a time (instead of 1) coz the Avalon requires a group of items sent to it at a time ... no big deal ... and it's not ground breaking coz it's not even a queue as per discussion about improving performance.
Neither of those are any sort of advancement on cgminer, the first is something I've been removing from cgminer, the 2nd is something that is being developed properly now for the BFL SC's if they appear soon and use it in an optimal way ... as a queue.
The other changes they may have made in cgminer will not be ground breaking in any manner or form.
i.e. there really is no excuse to not have already released the cgminer code by a company who promotes themselves as Open Source to the Bitcoin community.
The results of that are that if anyone else does get an Avalon (which is still questionable more than 3 weeks after they shipped the first one) they are unable to deal with any cgminer problems themselves - and also an already known memory problem cannot be implemented by anyone who gets an Avalon, until the source code is released, without having to reinvent the code (which would also normally be done if any of the devs actually had the hardware ... though I'll be the one to help Xiangfu to do that ... if he does get an Avalon)

PS they didn't meet their date they supplied last week of having it this weekend just passed.
My comment a few paragraphs up saying 'a date that either just expired or is yet another week away' was before I checked which weekend he said it would be (on the 8th)

...
Anyhow:

the source code release is set for this weekend on our project timeline at the moment.

...

Even allowing for being in the wrong country (NewYork USA) and adding a whole extra day delay ... it's still past the weekend and no source on the link on the web site or any of the threads I've checked.
I guess it 'could' be a "give the source only to Jeff" ... but as far as Jeff is concerned he doesn't even want it ... and that smells of a rat somewhere with both Jeff and Avalon.

[nathanrees19]

When Avalon is going to disclose their voltage regulator and clock synthesizer programming information

What the actual fuck. Why would fine-grained details about TSMC's manufacturing nodes be present in the modified cgminer?

[kano]

...
I dont think the GPL license says anything about getting free hardware because you commit some code.

Really - you sure of that - you were actually able to read all the words in the GPLv3 license - no words need explaining?
I'm not quite sure why you needed to make an OT post proving that you've learnt to read.
Some sort of milestone you've finally reached?

Also ... let me know when you can actually commit a line of useful code ... some time in the distant future.

Anyway, Xiangfu is getting one as per GitSyncom's statement ... and as I've said a few times ... I don't want one.

[nathanrees19]

Again, I'm just quoting for future reference because

No, you're quoting because you actually think that someone would bother to go back and edit their post after you (literally or figuratively) school them using your vast intellect, and that they wouldn't be able to face being humiliated by you. Since you think that this is reasonable behavior, I shall do the same.

When Avalon is going to disclose their voltage regulator and clock synthesizer programming information it will allow competent people to obtain very detailed information about TSMC process used.

Quoted, because it seems like you actually believe that detailed information about TSMC's processes exists in the modded cgminer.

[nathanrees19]

getting free hardware because you commit some code.

If you keep repeating this, it may become true! Maybe try tapping your heels together to increase the odds.

[tnkflx]

So... Nice weather outside, no?

[punin]

getting free hardware because you commit some code.

If you keep repeating this, it may become true! Maybe try tapping your heels together to increase the odds.

You might wanna be careful with those heel-tricks or you might end up in Kansas

[Bicknellski]

Are you actually complaining about the GPL license? kjj is absolutely correct. Avalon took GPL source, modified it, and failed to offer the source. That is a violation, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if they promised to release it later. It doesn't matter if they are giving up trade secrets to release it. If they don't like the terms of the GPL, they shouldn't have used GPL source. But they did use GPL source, and they have violated the license.

What I'm pointing out is that kjj is preaching from the Free Software Foundation bible in the church of Hardware.

The actions that make sense in software business are frequently suicidal in the hardware business. This is because of the cost structure: hardware is mostly front-end-loaded, whereas software is mostly back-end-loaded.

Yes, Avalon made a mistake by using a code requiring GPLv3 compliance. They should've designed a separation layer like many hardware vendors that support Linux. But the Avalon team is young and inexperienced and they didn't design for that.

My position is that rational supporters of Bitcoin would attempt to come up with some middle-of-the-road solution to safeguard the existence of viable competition of multiple vendors in the Bitcoin ASIC business. What I see is almost exact opposite: they are asking Avalon to nearly commit suicide for the sake of an ilusory freedom. Ilusory, because for the gain of few pages of source the whole Bitcoin ecosystem is paying the price of severely disadvantaging one of the ASIC vendors, to the point that in the next iteration we could have a monopoly.

The rational behaviour would be probably along several possible lines:

a) disclose the code only to Jeff Garzik. He's professionally involved in Linux kernel development and may be able to offer some useful advice on how to both comply with GPLv3 and TSMC/whoever-else NDAs.

b) offer to escrow the code with Bitcoin Foundation and have a programmer at B.F. to produce an obfuscated code that complies both with GPLv3 and NDAs. There are already multiple precedents in escrowing the information with Gavin Andresen, but thus far the escrow was security-related.

c) I personally think that the "binary blob" workaround isn't viable here for purely technical reasons. But I may be wrong. Maybe somebody willing and able to sign the NDA could help Avalon to develop such a solution.

d) take a chill pill and make Avalon folks pinky swar that they disclose the required information after the competition shipped and after the subsequent batches are locked in with TSMC.

But this thread isn't about being rational. It is about militancy, a very short-sighted militancy of playing open-face chinese-rules poker at the traditional-rules poker table.

Think for a moment: What would Richard Stallman do if he had a single tapeout to his name before he received his MacArthur Fellowship? We wouldn't have a Free Software Foundation. We would have maybe a Free Logic Foundation or Free Computation Foundation or something else. But I believe that we would be better off: maybe we could have open-source processors and disk drives in our open-source computers.

+1 Thanks for this clarity.

[organofcorti]

Again, I'm just quoting for future reference because

No, you're quoting because you actually think that someone would bother to go back and edit their post after you (literally or figuratively) school them using your vast intellect, and that they wouldn't be able to face being humiliated by you. Since you think that this is reasonable behavior, I shall do the same.

It is reasonable behaviour. Lots of people edit or delete old or incorrect posts. It's useful to quote for posterity posts a member thinks is important or, for example, we'd never have reeces' wonderful and inventive insults to read.

[2112]

Well, the feedback from the gentle readers

2112's post sounded awfully cryptic

and not-so-gentle readers

Quoted, because it seems like you actually believe that detailed information about TSMC's processes exists in the modded cgminer.

is that my "Teach yourself IC design,fabrication&test in 21 minutes" lecture is too hard and sounds like black magic.

I'm going to quote single linear thought from my post to maybe make it easier to follow.

I'm not sure how much TSMC values the non-disclosure about the manufacturing node that Avalon used. But before they had their chips manufactured by TSMC they had to sign something about obeying reasonable care to avoid disclosing TSMC-proprietary and whoever-else-proprietary information. SHA-2 is an example of a self-testing structure, something akin to the test structures used in the manufacturing process testing and calibration.

When Avalon is going to disclose their voltage regulator and clock synthesizer programming information it will allow competent people to obtain very detailed information about TSMC process used. I don't think that theres much commercial value in that, but it is the intentions that count. Avalon signed not to disclose, but allowed disclosure through carelessness. TSMC aren't going to be thrilled about it and will drive harder bargain when Avalon tries to order the 2nd batch. I'm not expecting somebody from Chronicle Technology open the account to post "Thanks, suckers.", but maybe some of the Avalon competitors will do that.

The technique I'm talking above is called "yield estimation using test data". SHA-2 is 100% self-testing and trivial to reverse-engineer. Competent semiconductor manufacture engineer can with the help of changing clock frequency and supply voltage obtain a highly proprietary data in a completely non-destructive way (no chip desoldering, decaping, etc.)

An observant reader may ask "why neither Intel nor AMD seem to care about chip with unlocked clock-multiplier and voltage identifier". The answer is "binning". A large manufacturer will do an extensive test of their chips and sort them into bins. When they sell the "enthusiast-grade" chips with unlocked clock they sell them from the "fastest process corner" bin. All other bins are clock-locked and sold cheaper into OEM market. By "bin sorting" the manufacturer can completely obfuscate actual process parameters and make competitive yield estimation pointless.

On the other hand Bitcoin ASIC vendors cannot afford detailed chip testing, both because of financial and time constraints. Any chip that passes quick needle-test on the wafer prober will be packaged and mounted in the shipping product. This situation gives the analyst the sampling of an entire defect/yield curve for the fabrication process.

As far as I know the most commercially/competetively interesting information is obtained by testing the worst chips, those from the bin nearest to the "trash bin", the ones that barely met the specifications. In fact the content of the "trash bin" is quite valuable to the competition and therefore each fab carefully destroys the chips that failed the acceptance tests.

I hope that the above addition my posts will look more like grey magic than black magic. Please do some web searches about "yield estimation chip" and read the freely-available information.

[maqifrnswa]

Is 2122's argument, "because it is inconvenient to my business practice I will violate the license agreement?" So if I out-license a patent to you for a fee, will you just stop paying me because it's better for you to not pay me than pay me?

You can take that position, but license violations open you up to lawsuit liability (cease and desist at a minimum, and damages at a maximum).

If you don't believe me, google Aaron Swartz...

Also, Avalon agreed to the terms of the GPL by using the software. No one forced them to use it. If they don't want to disclose code, then just write your own miner software (like BFL did with easyminer...)

If you want to use cgminer, then follow the terms of the license. The alternative is not use cgminer.

EDIT: I'm in small business hardware and software. I sometimes choose GPL and sometimes not, depending on my strategy. Avalon can do the same.

[PuertoLibre]

getting free hardware because you commit some code.

If you keep repeating this, it may become true! Maybe try tapping your heels together to increase the odds.

Selective blindness is always interesting.

[The-Real-Link]

Thanks for the clarification there, 2112.  I didn't type that it was cryptic though because I didn't understand your terms or the concept of binning after the fact, I only put it there as saying that Avalon is not in a good position at the moment with respect to their licenses apparently.

Good post Maqi.

[nathanrees19]

Competent semiconductor manufacture engineer can with the help of changing clock frequency and supply voltage obtain a highly proprietary data in a completely non-destructive way (no chip desoldering, decaping, etc.)

I do see what you're saying now, but you're still assuming that fine-grained control of individual chip frequencies and voltages (since you'll have a hard time getting good data if you can only do a whole board of 80? chips at once) exists within the modded cgminer and not an FPGA/MCU blob and also that this can't be trivially replicated by monitoring the usb-serial comms and also that someone actually has an Avalon unit (lol) that they don't mind risking for the tests (lol) and also that someone actually cares that much about this data to go to the effort at all.

It's a bit of a long limb, especially since Avalon wouldn't have picked GPL code if this was a serious concern (or they're license violating assholes, but PL has assured us that they aren't).

[-ck]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

[jgarzik]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?  It is difficult to summon the motivation.  Ask again in 30 days...

[-ck]

Ok.

Hey Bitsyncom, could you please post the source to your modifications to the GPL licensed cgminer code?

Thanks,
Con.

[organofcorti]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?  It is difficult to summon the motivation.  Ask again in 30 days...

The asking is pretty simple - you could just cut and paste Con's example:

Ok.

Hey Bitsyncom, could you please post the source to your modifications to the GPL licensed cgminer code?

Thanks,
Con.

[BitSyncom]

Ok.

Hey Bitsyncom, could you please post the source to your modifications to the GPL licensed cgminer code?

Thanks,
Con.

will do once organized, We have no intention to not disclose the source code.

[nathanrees19]

will do once organized, We have no intention to not disclose the source code.

Only to violate the license just a little bit?

[kano]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?

Awwww ... it's more difficult to ask now? ... for the source that was available at least 24 days ago?
I guess that means all this sucking up to Avalon has caused continuous deterioration of your brain over the last 24 days and it's getting more difficult to join all those big words of more than 3 letters together.

It is difficult to summon the motivation.

Difficulty finding the  motivation to stand up for OpenSource?
Hmm ... I guess that makes it pretty clear where you stand against OpenSource.

A Bitcoin dev who can be easily bought with a 25BTC 'donation' ... and ditch OpenSource as easily as that ...
Doesn't say much for Bitcoin devs ...

Ask again in 30 days...

Not sure if anyone else was expecting that, but I certainly am not surprised at all.
You certainly have no respect from me regarding you blatant lack of support for OpenSource - though I'm certain that doesn't concern you.
But again, I'm not surprised, you were paid off to do it and did it for cheap.

[nathanrees19]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?  It is difficult to summon the motivation.  Ask again in 30 days...

Actually, can you post the cgminer binary? 1 satoshi says I can reverse engineer most of their changes before they release the source.

[Mobius]

Ok.

Hey Bitsyncom, could you please post the source to your modifications to the GPL licensed cgminer code?

Thanks,
Con.

will do once organized, We have no intention to not disclose the source code.

I make it simple. You release product, you release source. There is no need to organize it further. You obviously have it organized enough to release the product.

[mobodick]

Well, the feedback from the gentle readers

2112's post sounded awfully cryptic

and not-so-gentle readers

Quoted, because it seems like you actually believe that detailed information about TSMC's processes exists in the modded cgminer.

is that my "Teach yourself IC design,fabrication&test in 21 minutes" lecture is too hard and sounds like black magic.

I'm going to quote single linear thought from my post to maybe make it easier to follow.

I'm not sure how much TSMC values the non-disclosure about the manufacturing node that Avalon used. But before they had their chips manufactured by TSMC they had to sign something about obeying reasonable care to avoid disclosing TSMC-proprietary and whoever-else-proprietary information. SHA-2 is an example of a self-testing structure, something akin to the test structures used in the manufacturing process testing and calibration.

When Avalon is going to disclose their voltage regulator and clock synthesizer programming information it will allow competent people to obtain very detailed information about TSMC process used. I don't think that theres much commercial value in that, but it is the intentions that count. Avalon signed not to disclose, but allowed disclosure through carelessness. TSMC aren't going to be thrilled about it and will drive harder bargain when Avalon tries to order the 2nd batch. I'm not expecting somebody from Chronicle Technology open the account to post "Thanks, suckers.", but maybe some of the Avalon competitors will do that.

The technique I'm talking above is called "yield estimation using test data". SHA-2 is 100% self-testing and trivial to reverse-engineer. Competent semiconductor manufacture engineer can with the help of changing clock frequency and supply voltage obtain a highly proprietary data in a completely non-destructive way (no chip desoldering, decaping, etc.)

An observant reader may ask "why neither Intel nor AMD seem to care about chip with unlocked clock-multiplier and voltage identifier". The answer is "binning". A large manufacturer will do an extensive test of their chips and sort them into bins. When they sell the "enthusiast-grade" chips with unlocked clock they sell them from the "fastest process corner" bin. All other bins are clock-locked and sold cheaper into OEM market. By "bin sorting" the manufacturer can completely obfuscate actual process parameters and make competitive yield estimation pointless.

On the other hand Bitcoin ASIC vendors cannot afford detailed chip testing, both because of financial and time constraints. Any chip that passes quick needle-test on the wafer prober will be packaged and mounted in the shipping product. This situation gives the analyst the sampling of an entire defect/yield curve for the fabrication process.

As far as I know the most commercially/competetively interesting information is obtained by testing the worst chips, those from the bin nearest to the "trash bin", the ones that barely met the specifications. In fact the content of the "trash bin" is quite valuable to the competition and therefore each fab carefully destroys the chips that failed the acceptance tests.

I hope that the above addition my posts will look more like grey magic than black magic. Please do some web searches about "yield estimation chip" and read the freely-available information.

The process that seems to be used is quite old. There is not a lot anyone can learn on this scale. Competitive electronics design is happening on the extremes where new structural designs are actually needed for progress.
At the level avalon delivered they were working with well developed tech using macro blocks.
I'd guess not very interesting to the competition.

Moreover, avalon could have easily developed cgminer in a way that would separate the TSMC sensitive data.
While you claim that there must be sensitive data in their version of cgminer i see no proof of that. In fact, because they don't release the code (even in redacted form) there is no way to actually check. So your claims are completely baseless.

But in any case, if there actually IS sensitive data baked into this version of cgminer then avalon have put themselfs at odds with either the fab license or the GPL. One requires them to disclose what the other forbids to disclose.
This is a situation that is entirely avalons fault and should not have existed in the first place.
That alone should be enough for the community to shunt avalon as they turned out to be greedy bastards.

[mobodick]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?  It is difficult to summon the motivation.  Ask again in 30 days...

It seems to me to be much more likely that you enjoy your asics so much that you just desided to stfu...

[Raoul Duke]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?  It is difficult to summon the motivation.  Ask again in 30 days...

Can I start distributing a Red Hat fork with my hardware, as an essential part of it, without releasing the source and you'll talk to your bosses about them waiting 30 days so I can remove "some debugging code"?
No lawsuits, deal?
Oh, BTW, if your boss asks for the source code right away he will make license compliance a considerably more difficult task. Ask again in 30 days, maybe?

[Syke]

Ok.

Hey Bitsyncom, could you please post the source to your modifications to the GPL licensed cgminer code?

Thanks,
Con.

will do once organized, We have no intention to not disclose the source code.

That's not for you to chose. You are in violation of the GPL. You shipped binaries, now deliver the source code. There is nothing to organize.

[Dalkore]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.   He said is will be released in 30 days so there you have it.  

Linksys used open source software in their routers for quite some time before they finally released the source to be compliant with GPL.  

Bottomline is that they are working in small team with a tight deadline against stiff competition and they have made it clear that consist bashing, name calling and nagging is not going to affect their decision or speed up the 30 days window.  

Leave it be, come back in 30 days if nothing has happened and go lick your wounded egos.  

Disclosure:  Being a paying customer I care about ship time over GPL at this point, once it fully ships, that is another story.  My company provides Asterisk PBX systems running on Linux so I understand the arguement, don't get me wrong.

[jgarzik]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.

Or free hardware requests disguised as political statements

If any of these teenagers like kano had a clue about pursuing GPL violations, they would understand that going straight to curse words and screaming accusations is logically less likely to produce the source code in a meaningful amount of time.  It is also less likely to produce long term cooperation, as it creates a hostile environment at the start of the relationship.

There is lots of good text and FAQs from folks with a track record of pursuing GPL violations at http://gpl-violations.org/ including http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html which suggests

How can I help gpl-violations.org ?

Firstly by not reacting to a technical GPL violation in an extreme fashion. Secondly by checking the violation is indeed a violation.

Join the mailing lists, discuss issues there first. Be polite but firm when dealing with companies and remember that the goal is to ensure a company stops violating the GPL and does not violate it again, rather than to leave a smoking crater at the location of their HQ... at least not on the first offense.

Keep records of conversations with companies. Co-ordinate with others. A company faced with eight different stories will find it hard to deal with. A company faced with a single accurate information source can respond better.

Beware the "public shaming" bomb. It's easy to let off, but very hard to defuse if you made a mistake or the issue turned out to be minor and is rapidly resolved. In addition companies may become very defensive in such cases and decide to "tough it out". We want to build bridges and giving a company no way to avoid losing face hinders that, especially in certain cultures.

If we want to encourage Avalon to be a contributing open source community member, throwing curses and legal deadlines at the outset is the last thing you want to do.  Act like a mature adult, and understand that everybody has different priorities and perspectives.

Understand that these details may take weeks or months to sort out, especially if it is the first release of a new product line.

Coordinate with other interested parties in the bitcoin community, come up with some positive reasons why Avalon should open source their work, open a dialogue with Avalon, work with the company to show them that open source makes engineering and economic sense.

You don't want the only incentive to use open source being fear.  That just encourages a company to do anything they can to minimize or avoid open source as much as possible.

We want ASIC vendors to be open source friendly because it is good for everyone involved.

[mobodick]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.   He said is will be released in 30 days so there you have it.  

Linksys used open source software in their routers for quite some time before they finally released the source to be compliant with GPL.  

Bottomline is that they are working in small team with a tight deadline against stiff competition and they have made it clear that consist bashing, name calling and nagging is not going to affect their decision or speed up the 30 days window.  

Leave it be, come back in 30 days if nothing has happened and go lick your wounded egos.  

Disclosure:  Being a paying customer I care about ship time over GPL at this point, once it fully ships, that is another story.  My company provides Asterisk PBX systems running on Linux so I understand the arguement, don't get me wrong.

Prove this and you might have a point.
Any deadlines are voluntary and the competition is butterfly "the chips will be on their way soon" labs.

[Nemesis]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.

Or free hardware requests disguised as political statements

If any of these teenagers like kano had a clue about pursuing GPL violations, they would understand that going straight to curse words and screaming accusations is logically less likely to produce the source code in a meaningful amount of time.  It is also less likely to produce long term cooperation, as it creates a hostile environment at the start of the relationship.

Say the kid himself, only disguised in a man body. I feel terrible for your kids if any. Dont make the doctor slap your wife after he delivers your child.

[mobodick]

If we want to encourage Avalon to be a contributing open source community member, ...

Didn't they kindof already decided to contribute to the community by using a hacked up cgminer in a product they sell?
 

[mobodick]

We want ASIC vendors to be open source friendly because it is good for everyone involved.

So you suggest everyone sucks up to them as much as you do?
Is avalon just as friendly to the open source community?
Did they not already profit from the open source community by releasing a product that includes open source work?
And did they not agree to release the source code with the product in such a case?

The community should not have to play nice to have source code released.
Play their fanboy all you want, fact is they abuse their open cource license for competitive reasons.

Anyway, you should stay the hell out of this discussion because since you're just about the only one with a working box no one will take your word for being non-biased...

[Syke]

The community should not have to play nice to have source code released.

Playing nice has worked so well in the past:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83794.0

[Dalkore]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.   He said is will be released in 30 days so there you have it.  

Linksys used open source software in their routers for quite some time before they finally released the source to be compliant with GPL.  

Bottomline is that they are working in small team with a tight deadline against stiff competition and they have made it clear that consist bashing, name calling and nagging is not going to affect their decision or speed up the 30 days window.  

Leave it be, come back in 30 days if nothing has happened and go lick your wounded egos.  

Disclosure:  Being a paying customer I care about ship time over GPL at this point, once it fully ships, that is another story.  My company provides Asterisk PBX systems running on Linux so I understand the arguement, don't get me wrong.

Prove this and you might have a point.
Any deadlines are voluntary and the competition is butterfly "the chips will be on their way soon" labs.

It is quite clear to anyone who can read the many posts and evaluate the information.


Also it is not about playing nice or not, the point is no matter how much you bitch or make hard statements, will not make them move any faster and only alienates you from getting to your goals.  Use tact and strategy and you will 9 times out of 10 get what you want faster and burn less bridges.

[Dalkore]

The community should not have to play nice to have source code released.

Playing nice has worked so well in the past:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83794.0

How are we tying an article about Bitcoin scams and getting source code released together?  I am at a loss?

[mobodick]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.   He said is will be released in 30 days so there you have it.  

Linksys used open source software in their routers for quite some time before they finally released the source to be compliant with GPL.  

Bottomline is that they are working in small team with a tight deadline against stiff competition and they have made it clear that consist bashing, name calling and nagging is not going to affect their decision or speed up the 30 days window.  

Leave it be, come back in 30 days if nothing has happened and go lick your wounded egos.  

Disclosure:  Being a paying customer I care about ship time over GPL at this point, once it fully ships, that is another story.  My company provides Asterisk PBX systems running on Linux so I understand the arguement, don't get me wrong.

Prove this and you might have a point.
Any deadlines are voluntary and the competition is butterfly "the chips will be on their way soon" labs.

It is quite clear to anyone who can read the many posts and evaluate the information.


Also it is not about playing nice or not, the point is no matter how much you bitch or make hard statements, will not make them move any faster and only alienates you from getting to your goals.  Use tact and strategy and you will 9 times out of 10 get what you want faster and burn less bridges.

I've read many of the posts and the 'competition' is late by months. Avalon now has a huge lead and should have more than enough time to get the source code together.
The deadlines were for avalon to set so there is no excuse for not having time to do source release.
The source code release should be part of the product.
In fact, the license states that a written voucher should have been provided as well.

It is not about bitching not making a difference either. It is about trusting avalon or not.
Avalon may be popular now but they can easily be beaten next generation. So the arrogance they show now can become fatal even this year.
The question is who needs who more. The community avalon or avalon the community?
My view is they should be respectfull of having this opportunity to apply their skills.

Anyway, it was not me who came up with the words playing nice.

[Syke]

The community should not have to play nice to have source code released.

Playing nice has worked so well in the past:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83794.0

How are we tying an article about Bitcoin scams and getting source code released together?  I am at a loss?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory

If the scams go unpunished, more scams will result.
If license violations go unpunished, more license violations will result.
"playing nice" just encourages more people to break the law/license/etc.

[jgarzik]

If the scams go unpunished, more scams will result.
If license violations go unpunished, more license violations will result.
"playing nice" just encourages more people to break the law/license/etc.

Read the links previously posted.  People with actual experience dealing with GPL violations disagree WRT playing nice.

It's also just common sense, Human Relationships 101.

[Dalkore]

The community should not have to play nice to have source code released.

Playing nice has worked so well in the past:

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=83794.0

How are we tying an article about Bitcoin scams and getting source code released together?  I am at a loss?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory

If the scams go unpunished, more scams will result.
If license violations go unpunished, more license violations will result.
"playing nice" just encourages more people to break the law/license/etc.

Ok you and the above post does have merit.  I guess how I am feeling is that this is a small project in the scheme of things and I wouldn't feel the inclination to flame a small company while in their initial phase of releasing to the public.

What say you? 

[mobodick]

If the scams go unpunished, more scams will result.
If license violations go unpunished, more license violations will result.
"playing nice" just encourages more people to break the law/license/etc.

It's also just common sense, Human Relationships 101.

Human relationship 101 is not going to help you if the other side unilateraly changes an agreement.
In fact, according to my human relationship manual it should be avalon apologizing to the community for breaking the license.
You try to somehow turn it all upside down.

[Syke]

Human relationship 101 is not going to help you if the other side unilateraly changes an agreement.
In fact, according to my human relationship manual it should be avalon apologizing to the community for breaking the license.
You try to somehow turn it all upside down.

Of course he's defending them. He's earning $270 profit per day because Avalon shipped only him an ASIC unit and he can rake in the bitcoins before the difficulty adjusts.

[PuertoLibre]

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?

Awwww ... it's more difficult to ask now? ... for the source that was available at least 24 days ago?
I guess that means all this sucking up to Avalon has caused continuous deterioration of your brain over the last 24 days and it's getting more difficult to join all those big words of more than 3 letters together.

It is difficult to summon the motivation.

Difficulty finding the  motivation to stand up for OpenSource?
Hmm ... I guess that makes it pretty clear where you stand against OpenSource.

A Bitcoin dev who can be easily bought with a 25BTC 'donation' ... and ditch OpenSource as easily as that ...
Doesn't say much for Bitcoin devs ...

Ask again in 30 days...

Not sure if anyone else was expecting that, but I certainly am not surprised at all.
You certainly have no respect from me regarding you blatant lack of support for OpenSource - though I'm certain that doesn't concern you.
But again, I'm not surprised, you were paid off to do it and did it for cheap.

The irony,
Kano won't support code if he doesn't get entitled to "free" hardware. Yet he bashes someone else who did fork over money to support hardware.

Very Ironic, don't you think?

[organofcorti]

<snip>  Ask again in 30 days...

Hey, isn't that one of the answers you get from one of those magic 8 ball thingies?

[kano]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.

Or free hardware requests disguised as political statements

Right, says the guy who's getting > $200 a day from 'his' Avalon while almost no one else gets one ... that he paid ~$1300 for and even got a 25BTC kickback for doing what he's been told by Avalon.

So in your case it's "sucking off Avalon" disguised as "cooperation"

If any of these teenagers like kano had a clue about pursuing GPL violations, they would understand that going straight to curse words and screaming accusations is logically less likely to produce the source code in a meaningful amount of time.  It is also less likely to produce long term cooperation, as it creates a hostile environment at the start of the relationship.

There is lots of good text and FAQs from folks with a track record of pursuing GPL violations at http://gpl-violations.org/ including http://gpl-violations.org/faq/violation-faq.html which suggests
...

Yes well, try to pretend you aren't a complete illiterate idiot and go read the fact that I did simply request the code to start with and was given a clearly bullshit answer about debugging code.
You may like to take it up the ass and say thank you ... I won't.

I have already clearly point out about the gpl-violations website with links - so yeah your not providing anything new to the discussion except more bending over and saying please insert.

I guess you also missed the fact that GitSyncom said the timeline was to have the source available almost a week ago ...

[PuertoLibre]

You may like to take it up the ass and say thank you ... I won't.

I have already clearly point out about the gpl-violations website with links - so yeah your not providing anything new to the discussion except more bending over and saying please insert.

I guess you also missed the fact that GitSyncom said the timeline was to have the source available almost a week ago ...

What is a "Git"?

Click the link: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=git

------------------------

A reminder about extending courtesy:

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?  It is difficult to summon the motivation.  Ask again in 30 days...

The one thing I don't understand in all this flameage is why Jeff Garzik isn't championing the request for source from Avalon. Jeff?

After certain people made that task considerably more difficult?

Awwww ... it's more difficult to ask now? ... for the source that was available at least 24 days ago?
I guess that means all this sucking up to Avalon has caused continuous deterioration of your brain over the last 24 days and it's getting more difficult to join all those big words of more than 3 letters together.

Moral of the story (stated clearly by Jeff, violated in all senses of the word by Kano):

Or free hardware requests disguised as political statements

If any of these teenagers like kano had a clue about pursuing GPL violations, they would understand that going straight to curse words and screaming accusations is logically less likely to produce the source code in a meaningful amount of time.  It is also less likely to produce long term cooperation, as it creates a hostile environment at the start of the relationship.

Don't ask for code with one hand, and call the other person a cock sucker, an anal rapist/sodomist, AND a money whore by receiving a discount on their own money used to purchase their own hardware!

[nathanrees19]

Note: After reading through these threads it is clear this discussion/request has turned in to Political Statement about Open Source and trying to prove something.

Or free hardware requests disguised as political statements

j, people are only asking for sources here. Nobody is demanding that a free unit be sent to anyone.

Yes, historically devs have received hardware and provided support in return, but that doesn't mean that requests for source are requests for hardware (especially since multiple people want sources for different reasons). Someone saying "if I get hardware then I'll definitely support it" does not imply "I expect to get hardware [if code is released]".

Why must you make this claim? Are you trying to draw attention away from the fact that you are in the best position to request sources, yet you refuse to do so?

A license like the GPL is meaningless if it isn't actively enforced. You can "play nice" by politely requesting a speedy source release from your position as a customer. Saying "oh, give it 30 days" is not playing nice; that is essentially disregarding the violation.

[kano]

...
The irony,
Kano won't support code if he doesn't get entitled to "free" hardware. Yet he bashes someone else who did fork over money to support hardware.

Very Ironic, don't you think?

The only irony is that you can't read and think that because you can't read it's ok to make stupid comments

I've already stated I'll be the one who will help Xiangfu update (rewrite) the cgminer code to what it should be when he finally gets an Avalon ...
Yeah I know I'm only gonna do that coz Avalon gave me a free Avalon ... oh wait ... what? ... hmm ... now why would I do that ... they didn't give me anything ... damn you mean I didn't help him back at the beginning of Jan when he first asked me about the driver he was writing?
But yes with Xiangfu, I'll have no issue with helping him even though that will in effect be helping Avalon ... now if I could just find a way around that

[nathanrees19]

The irony,
Kano won't support code if he doesn't get entitled to "free" hardware. Yet he bashes someone else who did fork over money to support hardware.

Very Ironic, don't you think?

I've noticed a few leaps of logic in this thread. In particular:

"I'll support it if I get hardware" -> "I won't support it if I don't get hardware" -> "I expect to be expected to support it" -> "I expect to receive hardware"

Every leap is logically fallacious.

[PuertoLibre]

...
The irony,
Kano won't support code if he doesn't get entitled to "free" hardware. Yet he bashes someone else who did fork over money to support hardware.

Very Ironic, don't you think?

The only irony is that you can't read and think that because you can't read it's ok to make stupid comments

I've already stated I'll be the one who will help Xiangfu update (rewrite) the cgminer code to what it should be when he finally gets an Avalon ...
Yeah I know I'm only gonna do that coz Avalon gave me a free Avalon ... oh wait ... what? ... hmm ... now why would I do that ... they didn't give me anything ... damn you mean I didn't help him back at the beginning of Jan when he first asked me about the driver he was writing?
But yes with Xiangfu, I'll have no issue with helping him even though that will in effect be helping Avalon ... now if I could just find a way around that

Oh, it sounds like you have made a commitment. Lets see if you stick to that.

If only we could get you to tone down the sodomy comments. That would be almost respectable.

[PuertoLibre]

The irony,
Kano won't support code if he doesn't get entitled to "free" hardware. Yet he bashes someone else who did fork over money to support hardware.

Very Ironic, don't you think?

I've noticed a few leaps of logic in this thread. In particular:

"I'll support it if I get hardware" -> "I won't support it if I don't get hardware" -> "I expect to be expected to support it" -> "I expect to receive hardware"

Every leap is logically fallacious.

Read back and you'll see there is no "leaps in logic".

Kano just "re-frames" his previous tune when it suits him and "re-spins" prior history when he starts to look bad in context.

As others have noted, he is pretty transparent about it. Now if you [nathan] want to aid him in a con, be my guest. You may find some who haven't read the previous posts but will support the re-spins of previous posts "written in a 'hard to understand' context".

[nathanrees19]

If only we could get you to tone down the sodomy comments. That would be almost respectable.

Why? Modern societies are very accepting of that kind of thing these days.

[nathanrees19]

Read back and you'll see there is no "leaps in logic".

No, if you want to claim that he is demanding free hardware, then you should prove it.

[Vicus]

All Avalon bashers will end up with no source code at all. And what will you do then? I guess - nothing, but whine here. Fuck off and return when they miss their deadline for release.

[nathanrees19]

All Avalon bashers will end up with no source code at all. And what will you do then? I guess - nothing, but whine here. Fuck off and return when they miss their deadline for release.

They missed their deadline for a demo. They missed their deadline for an image release (which should have included source). They missed their deadline for 298 out of 300 units (sorry, shipping less than 1% of orders does not count). They refuse to keep those customers up to date. They claim to be open source but they keep delaying the source with poor excuses. They completely fucked up the batch #2 ordering. Again, they're not keeping batch #2 customers up to date. They don't even know when they will open batch #2 again for orders.

I think it's pretty reasonable for people to be annoyed at Avalon right now, and it's also pretty reasonable to be asking for them to release the source when they claim to be open source and use GPL software.

If you're a troll, I'm actually going to give you 4/10 because you managed to quite accurately imitate an Avalon fanboi.

[organofcorti]

If only we could get you to tone down the sodomy comments. That would be almost respectable.

Why? Modern societies are very accepting of that kind of thing these days.

Because it's off topic. This is the "Kano vs Bitsyncom" thread, not the "Those by Whom I will not be Sodomised" thread.

[nathanrees19]

If only we could get you to tone down the sodomy comments. That would be almost respectable.

Why? Modern societies are very accepting of that kind of thing these days.

Because it's off topic. This is the "Kano vs Bitsyncom" thread, not the "Those by Whom I will not be Sodomised" thread.

A fair point.

[Vicus]

If you're a troll, I'm actually going to give you 4/10 because you managed to quite accurately imitate an Avalon fanboi.

WTF? I have order in first and second batch, and I'm disappointed too, because of poor communication with Avalon, but I'm reading that thread and realizing, people is more looks like a kids in a mart, whining "I want this toy and I want it now!!". What will you do as parent with that kid?

[Dalkore]

All Avalon bashers will end up with no source code at all. And what will you do then? I guess - nothing, but whine here. Fuck off and return when they miss their deadline for release.

They missed their deadline for 298 out of 300 units (sorry, shipping less than 1% of orders does not count). They refuse to keep those customers up to date. They claim to be open source but they keep delaying the source with poor excuses. They completely fucked up the batch #2 ordering. Again, they're not keeping batch #2 customers up to date. They don't even know when they will open batch #2 again for orders.

I think it's pretty reasonable for people to be annoyed at Avalon right now, and it's also pretty reasonable to be asking for them to release the source when they claim to be open source and use GPL software.

If you're a troll, I'm actually going to give you 4/10 because you managed to quite accurately imitate an Avalon fanboi.

No, the deadline is March 1st and we are in the middle of February. 

They have not refused, they stated that they are not going too  and "no news is good news".

"They" did not purposefully mess up their own pre-order.  Obviously things could of been better and there were bugs in the ecommerce process.   

Again, they are choosing to spend their time resources on building and shipping unit over customer service with a self-admitted "small team"

Yes, there is no date and they have alluded to this in the newsletter.

Anymore mis-representations for us?  Just because you are not happy doesn't mean you can make stuff up.   Be honest.

[mobodick]

If you're a troll, I'm actually going to give you 4/10 because you managed to quite accurately imitate an Avalon fanboi.

WTF? I have order in first and second batch, and I'm disappointed too, because of poor communication with Avalon, but I'm reading that thread and realizing, people is more looks like a kids in a mart, whining "I want this toy and I want it now!!". What will you do as parent with that kid?

May i remind you that these kids actually payed some substantial monies to get the toy?

[mobodick]

All Avalon bashers will end up with no source code at all. And what will you do then? I guess - nothing, but whine here. Fuck off and return when they miss their deadline for release.

They missed their deadline for 298 out of 300 units (sorry, shipping less than 1% of orders does not count). They refuse to keep those customers up to date. They claim to be open source but they keep delaying the source with poor excuses. They completely fucked up the batch #2 ordering. Again, they're not keeping batch #2 customers up to date. They don't even know when they will open batch #2 again for orders.

I think it's pretty reasonable for people to be annoyed at Avalon right now, and it's also pretty reasonable to be asking for them to release the source when they claim to be open source and use GPL software.

If you're a troll, I'm actually going to give you 4/10 because you managed to quite accurately imitate an Avalon fanboi.

No, the deadline is March 1st and we are in the middle of February. 

They have not refused, they stated that they are not going too  and "no news is good news".

"They" did not purposefully mess up their own pre-order.  Obviously things could of been better and there were bugs in the ecommerce process.   

Again, they are choosing to spend their time resources on building and shipping unit over customer service with a self-admitted "small team"

Yes, there is no date and they have alluded to this in the newsletter.

Anymore mis-representations for us?  Just because you are not happy doesn't mean you can make stuff up.   Be honest.

Since we're summing claims here, how about the claim that avalon is producing 12 units per day?
Where are they?

And what deadline are you talking about? Their deadline for releasing source? Where in their license agreement did it state they can prospone the release to a convenient date?

[Dalkore]

All Avalon bashers will end up with no source code at all. And what will you do then? I guess - nothing, but whine here. Fuck off and return when they miss their deadline for release.

They missed their deadline for 298 out of 300 units (sorry, shipping less than 1% of orders does not count). They refuse to keep those customers up to date. They claim to be open source but they keep delaying the source with poor excuses. They completely fucked up the batch #2 ordering. Again, they're not keeping batch #2 customers up to date. They don't even know when they will open batch #2 again for orders.

I think it's pretty reasonable for people to be annoyed at Avalon right now, and it's also pretty reasonable to be asking for them to release the source when they claim to be open source and use GPL software.

If you're a troll, I'm actually going to give you 4/10 because you managed to quite accurately imitate an Avalon fanboi.

No, the deadline is March 1st and we are in the middle of February. 

They have not refused, they stated that they are not going too  and "no news is good news".

"They" did not purposefully mess up their own pre-order.  Obviously things could of been better and there were bugs in the ecommerce process.   

Again, they are choosing to spend their time resources on building and shipping unit over customer service with a self-admitted "small team"

Yes, there is no date and they have alluded to this in the newsletter.

Anymore mis-representations for us?  Just because you are not happy doesn't mean you can make stuff up.   Be honest.

Since we're summing claims here, how about the claim that avalon is producing 12 units per day?
Where are they?

And what deadline are you talking about? Their deadline for releasing source? Where in their license agreement did it state they can prospone the release to a convenient date?

I would like to know as well, I am assuming they are in-route and held up for CNY.   Deadline mentioned is for Batch #1 being fully shipped.   

I hope they would release the code on a convenient date compared in an inconvenient date.   Do you need to state that now?   Again this bickering out the source code sounds like people are having hurt egos because they can't force a little company that is juggling many balls to do what they want, when they want.   

[firefop]

 

I would like to know as well, I am assuming they are in-route and held up for CNY.   Deadline mentioned is for Batch #1 being fully shipped.   

I hope they would release the code on a convenient date compared in an inconvenient date.   Do you need to state that now?   Again this bickering out the source code sounds like people are having hurt egos because they can't force a little company that is juggling many balls to do what they want, when they want.   

As someone's who has no vested interest either in Avalon or Kano, being that I never ordered an produce - and frankly think Kano's an ass - I have to say the following:

The fact that they haven't released the source in a timely manner and are violating GPL by withholding it (yes, I actually agree with Kano on this one)... should be raising alarm bells like crazy... You're talking about running a few scripts to remove debug related code. doing a test compile and publishing. That should literally take one coder a couple of hours tops... and that's if they have to manually locate everything they'd want to remove. If the code is at all decent they'd have it tagged already so it could be removed much more quickly.

This whole discussion indicates that something isn't right. I have a feeling I know what it is... but choose not to speculate here. Let me just opt out of ever being a customer of Avalon right now.

[Syke]

The fact that they haven't released the source in a timely manner and are violating GPL by withholding it (yes, I actually agree with Kano on this one)... should be raising alarm bells like crazy... You're talking about running a few scripts to remove debug related code. doing a test compile and publishing. That should literally take one coder a couple of hours tops... and that's if they have to manually locate everything they'd want to remove. If the code is at all decent they'd have it tagged already so it could be removed much more quickly.

It's even more than that. Whatever source was used to create the binaries, that's the source that needs to be made available. There's no cleanup to do! In fact, doing some sort of cleanup would be in violation of the GPL, as then the sources wouldn't match the binaries they already shipped.

[firefop]

The fact that they haven't released the source in a timely manner and are violating GPL by withholding it (yes, I actually agree with Kano on this one)... should be raising alarm bells like crazy... You're talking about running a few scripts to remove debug related code. doing a test compile and publishing. That should literally take one coder a couple of hours tops... and that's if they have to manually locate everything they'd want to remove. If the code is at all decent they'd have it tagged already so it could be removed much more quickly.

It's even more than that. Whatever source was used to create the binaries, that's the source that needs to be made available. There's no cleanup to do! In fact, doing some sort of cleanup would be in violation of the GPL, as then the sources wouldn't match the binaries they already shipped.

Well if it were actually debug information the compiler would have stripped it out during the compile anyway - that's standard in most (if not all) modern compilers.

[kano]

...
Kano just "re-frames" his previous tune when it suits him and "re-spins" prior history when he starts to look bad in context.
...

Show one example of each of those 2 lies you posted ... one ... just one ... not two, not three ... just one of each.
Can't find them? Yes now you understand why I think you are a complete lying piece of shit

Basically all you are saying is that if you were in my situation you would be demanding Avalon to be giving you mining devices.

I haven't done that ... any where ... any time.

In the past (a year ago) I received an Icarus from ngzhang after helping xiangfu to solve the problems he had to get the Icarus code to work.
After I found out he was really sending it to me, I offered to buy (and paid full price) for a 2nd one, since he was giving me one.
Seemed fair that he would still make some money out of me ... and I could 'just' afford to buy the 2nd Icarus.
I've also bought a (full price) Icarus DevKit from him much later ... to get the jTag cable.

The (only) other person (so far) who has supplied me with a mining device is Tom from bASIC.
He sent me an MMQ which I said (before he sent it) that I'd pay for it with the results of the mining from the ASIC device he was going to send me (yeah I can't afford to buy stuff ) I have since pretty much completely rewritten the MMQ code in cgminer, so that it actually works (which the code didn't) and is second to none in performance and error handling. I've even again this week done more critical work on the MMQ driver (all that possible since I actually have one)

For the last 2 months I've been writing the basis of a new USB interface in cgminer (no doubt it will need more work and improvement in the future) so that when ASIC devices do finally appear, I can ensure that I can write a driver as quickly as possible so that when the devices are shipped, they will have cgminer support.
I've ensured that by already rewriting the MMQ and BFL FPGA drivers to use it.

Yes of course I will never begrudge receiving BTC for mining with the devices I am given - why would I?
I don't begrudge it coz I know I will spend a lot of time and effort (as I have over the last year and do almost every day) working on improving and supporting cgminer.

Even when the Avalon device first showed up, I was interested in helping that person with it - but oddly enough he was quite antagonistic about me helping ... which eventually I said I wouldn't any more (though I did).
It was indeed amusing to see the screen generated by my code to prove the performance of the Avalon.

This is what I've done and been doing.
Don't go telling me I have your crappy values and ideals - I don't; and anyone, including the clearly corrupt piece of shit Jeff Garzik, who thinks they want to say my ideals match their crappy, shit ideals can go fuck themselves.

[PuertoLibre]

...
Kano just "re-frames" his previous tune when it suits him and "re-spins" prior history when he starts to look bad in context.
...

Show one example of each of those 2 lies you posted ... one ... just one ... not two, not three ... just one of each.
Can't find them? Yes now you understand why I think you are a complete lying piece of shit

No, you "poser". I don't have to lie. You said so quite clearly several times. Other people have quoted you before.

Spin is not the basis of an argument.

Basically all you are saying is that if you were in my situation you would be demanding Avalon to be giving you something.

I haven't done that ... any where ... any time.

You are correct, you didn't "demand" you stated you wouldn't be coding for the Avalon (at the time) if you didn't receive any hardware.

When I confronted you about this and told you to pay for it, you had plenty to say about why you didn't think you should. Case closed.

Then you went on a limb, posturing about how you don't believe you should code "for free".

When I put forth the idea that you could make a repayment you avoided the idea with a retort as to why "you think" you should be "compensated".

Every argument you stood behind was about getting free hardware without any payment.

You then went on another limb that "donated" hardware was cheaper than paying a programmer.

Do you see your angle in the grand scheme of things?
 
------------------------

Your later hostile attitude followed your [apparent] realization that you weren't going to get your way. Followed by BitSyncom asking you to "fuck off" a few times. (Primarily because you kept pestering him about that and the source code.)

In the past (a year ago) I received an Icarus from ngzhang after helping xiangfu to solve the problems he had to get the Icarus code to work.
After I found out he was really sending it to me, I offered to buy (and paid full price) for a 2nd one, since he was giving me one.
Seemed fair that he would still make some money out of me ... and I could 'just' afford to buy the 2nd Icarus.
I've also bought a (full price) Icarus DevKit from him much later ... to get the jTag cable.

That is nice of you.

But every instance where you have been approached with the idea of purchasing hardware in the last month has been rejected for one reason or another.

Including the idea of paying back the hardware by the coins it generated.

So your past actions has little relevance with your present attitude.

The (only) other person (so far) who has supplied me with a mining device is Tom from bASIC.
He sent me an MMQ which I said (before he sent it) that I'd pay for it with the results of the mining from the ASIC device he was going to send me (yeah I can't afford to buy stuff ) I have since pretty much completely rewritten the MMQ code in cgminer, so that it actually works (which the code didn't) and is second to none in performance and error handling. I've even again this week done more critical work on the MMQ driver (all that possible since I actually have one)

The first point to make is that the MMQ is an FPGA device. It is the older generation and therefore we are again talking about the past.

Now, I fully understand you are unable to buy hardware. Okay, I get it and respect your situation.

There are viable alternatives you could hash out with each company to pay for the devices at either a [possible] discount rate or through the [possible] BTC generated by the device once it is in your hands.

These are all ideas that didn't sit well with you. You made it positively clear you don't want that. (You may perhaps change your mind in the future, who knows?)

For the last 2 months I've been writing the basis of a new USB interface in cgminer (no doubt it will need more work and improvement in the future) so that when ASIC devices do finally appear, I can ensure that I can write a driver as quickly as possible so that when the devices are shipped, they will have cgminer support.
I've ensured that by already rewriting the MMQ and BFL FPGA drivers to use it.

Alright.

Yes of course I will never begrudge receiving BTC for mining with the devices I am given - why would I?
I don't begrudge it coz I know I will spend a lot of time and effort (as I have over the last year and do almost every day) working on improving and supporting cgminer.

Now you want "compensation". I have mentioned before that if you want to be compensated then you  should perhaps seek a contract with the vendors.

Not an "implicit" contract, but a very clear and outlined one.

If a company is not willing to play ball, you seem to resort to maligning them. (disguised as other issues.)

Even when the Avalon device first showed up, I was interested in helping that person with it - but oddly enough he was quite antagonistic about me helping ... which eventually I said I wouldn't any more (though I did).
It was indeed amusing to see the screen generated by my code to prove the performance of the Avalon.

I think you are missing the point of open source software.

You give and commit to it freely. If you are looking to use it as a form of implicit hardware exchange, then perhaps you should re-evaluate your goals.

Once Avalon releases the source code you won't have much to begrudge. I doubt that will stop you though.

This is what I've done and been doing.
Don't telling me I have your crappy values and ideals - I don't; and anyone, including the clearly corrupt piece of shit Jeff Garzik, who thinks they want to say my ideals match their crappy, shit ideals can go fuck themselves.

Your wrapper is coming off.

Here is some tape to hold it together:



You are clearly conflicted. You want people to believe one thing about you in your posturing, but in every other page you reinforce exactly what is being pointed out about you.

Don't slam Jeff, he paid for his hardware. Have you?

[Vicus]

PuertoLibre, wrong tape. Use right one:

[Turbor]

Bääääm!

This is what I've done and been doing.
Don't go telling me I have your crappy values and ideals - I don't; and anyone, including the clearly corrupt piece of shit Jeff Garzik, who thinks they want to say my ideals match their crappy, shit ideals can go fuck themselves.

[PuertoLibre]

PuertoLibre, wrong tape. Use right one:

[kano]

...
Kano just "re-frames" his previous tune when it suits him and "re-spins" prior history when he starts to look bad in context.
...

Show one example of each of those 2 lies you posted ... one ... just one ... not two, not three ... just one of each.
Can't find them? Yes now you understand why I think you are a complete lying piece of shit

No, you "poser". I don't have to lie. You said so quite clearly several times. Other people have quoted you before.

Spin is not the basis of an argument.

Basically all you are saying is that if you were in my situation you would be demanding Avalon to be giving you something.

I haven't done that ... any where ... any time.

You are correct, you didn't "demand" you stated you wouldn't be coding for the Avalon (at the time) if you didn't receive any hardware.

When I confronted you about this and told you to pay for it, you had plenty to say about why you didn't think you should. Case closed.

Then you went on a limb, posturing about how you don't believe you should code "for free".

When I put forth the idea that you could make a repayment you avoided the idea with a retort as to why "you think" you should be "compensated".

Every argument you stood behind was about getting free hardware without any payment.

You then went on another limb that "donated" hardware was cheaper than paying a programmer.

Do you see your angle in the grand scheme of things?
...

I don't see any quotes of what I have said ...
Quote these "re-frames" and "re-spins" or fuck off.
Just coz you say shit, doesn't mean anything.

[SRoulette]

A story of a whimsical relationship between one ASIC manufacturer and an unrequited (left wanting) software developer.

<Key scene in the public washroom (Asia style)>:

Kano: You know, I would love to code for Avalon.
Yifu: I bet you would. <Eyeball Kano for 5 seconds.>
Kano: You know, if I find an Avalon unit under my towel in the dressing room I just might keep and maintain code for it.
Yifu: <Scrubs his own back ignoring him.> I think we've got it covered.
Kano: You can scrub my back, I'll scrub yours?
<Kano waits for 10 minutes...nothing happens.>

<Yifu gets up afterwards and walks to the dressing room.>

<Key Kano throwing a hissy fit.>: I can't believe you won't send me an Avalon! How dare you?! ^&*^&*(

Yifu: Sorry, but we already have someone we paid for the software side of things. I simply do not need your "help" at this time.

Kano: Damn you! Do you expect me to work for freee?! I scratch you back, you scratch mine! Don't you understand you New Yorker!?

Yifu: WTF? Man, I don't need your help.

Kano: WTH? Didn't you just see me try to pressure you into leaving an Avalon under the towel?

Yifu: Look, if we need contracted labor we can pay for it. Right now, Xianfu (sorry I forgot his name) already has us covered for development.

Kano: You don't understand, I will keep developing software for you as long as you give me hardware! WTF don't you understand? Where is your source code?

Yifu: Look we will release it soon. Thats all.

Kano: NO you WON'T. I know you WON"T. READ the GPLv3 mutha...^&*^&*! You don't have a choice, give it to me NOW.

Kano: I know what going on here; You paid this xianfu in Avalons didn't you?!

Yifu: Look sir, don't speculate you don't know our contractual arrangements.

Yifu: Further, we will release it soon enough.

Kano: That is why you (Avalon) are such washed up has beens! You don't understand that if you just put the damn Avalon's under my Towel like I asked you to, you would be covered. Maybe...if I feel like it.

Kano: You guys suck!

Yifu: Look, we can give out units to those we think would appreciate it. So ^&*^ off.

-------------------
<Key scene of the top of a building and Kano wielding a rusty sword high in the sky. Ranting and raving>

Kano: I never asked outright for an Avalon. And you know what? I don't want one! I never asked for one. I WOULD HAVE...POSSIBLY, if I felt like it....provided labor for the price of an Avalon.

Kano: No obligations though!

------------------


Moral of the story, if you want to engage in programming AND be COMPENSATED. Sign a contract. Don't posture and pester someone. Then get angry and enrage in revisionist forum history to make yourself look better.

You don't understand what the open source community contributions are about. You want compensation. Whether subtle or blatant. Find donors, collect some bitcoins. Be nice to Yifu and get it paid off.

Or sign a contract where he and you agree on an expected level of service.

Before you say that not how it is, keep in mind the machine you wanted sent to you (for free) and for development purposes is also compensating you every day with Bitcoins on an ongoing basis.

Pay the man, or sign a contract for a specific guarantee, or at least be nice enough to let him bribe you. If it were possible at this stage.

very amusing and apt summary.

[kano]

...
very amusing and apt summary.

Apt based on what?
Feel free to point out where this aptness comes from.
... now 2 morons who cannot quote this so called proof of aptness.

[kano]

...
Followed by BitSyncom asking you to "fuck off" a few times. (Primarily because you kept pestering him about that and the source code.)
...

Interesting ...

GitSyncom has on a few occasions said he will release the source code.
He even gave a date of almost a week ago and didn't.
But I guess that, in your opinion, is to be expected of him?

[SRoulette]

...
very amusing and apt summary.

Apt based on what?
Feel free to point out where this aptness comes from.
... now 2 morons who cannot quote this so called proof of aptness.

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

[mobodick]

...
Kano just "re-frames" his previous tune when it suits him and "re-spins" prior history when he starts to look bad in context.
...

Show one example of each of those 2 lies you posted ... one ... just one ... not two, not three ... just one of each.
Can't find them? Yes now you understand why I think you are a complete lying piece of shit

No, you "poser". I don't have to lie. You said so quite clearly several times. Other people have quoted you before.

Spin is not the basis of an argument.

Basically all you are saying is that if you were in my situation you would be demanding Avalon to be giving you something.

I haven't done that ... any where ... any time.

You are correct, you didn't "demand" you stated you wouldn't be coding for the Avalon (at the time) if you didn't receive any hardware.

When I confronted you about this and told you to pay for it, you had plenty to say about why you didn't think you should. Case closed.

Then you went on a limb, posturing about how you don't believe you should code "for free".

When I put forth the idea that you could make a repayment you avoided the idea with a retort as to why "you think" you should be "compensated".

Every argument you stood behind was about getting free hardware without any payment.

You then went on another limb that "donated" hardware was cheaper than paying a programmer.

Do you see your angle in the grand scheme of things?
...

I don't see any quotes of what I have said ...
Quote these "re-frames" and "re-spins" or fuck off.
Just coz you say shit, doesn't mean anything.

Kano, there is an 'Ignore' button for trolls like PuertoLibre.
I can say it works like a charm.

[nathanrees19]

No, the deadline is March 1st and we are in the middle of February. 

In other words, they shift the goalposts back and forth when it's convenient for them. If you can't ship your fucking units in January, don't fucking say you're shipping in January. That was a hugely misleading move on their part.

They have not refused, they stated that they are not going too  and "no news is good news".

In other words, they have refused, and think refusing is a good thing.

"They" did not purposefully mess up their own pre-order.  Obviously things could of been better and there were bugs in the ecommerce process.   

What the fuck? Nobody purposefully messes up their own pre-orders. I'm only saying that they were incompetent because they somehow managed to fuck it up. And yes, it's their fault. They had multiple options for payment providers and they picked one which has apparently never handled anything close to this level of demand. If they did their research, they would have picked a provider that had actually done load testing. Online shop fronts should be a solved problem by now...

Again, they are choosing to spend their time resources on building and shipping unit over customer service with a self-admitted "small team"

I'm not suggesting that they should have spent hours upon hours talking to every customer. They must have a system for tracking orders (although it could be pen and paper, I guess. Technology is hard to use right?). It's not hard to have automatic email updates to customers when an order is in build, shipped etc. If they haven't gotten that far then they're fucking liars for suggesting that are building a dozen units per day. Maybe have a quick post every few days on here to keep track of overall progress. This wouldn't take even 1% of one team member's time; they could even do it while taking a shit.

Of course, they've taken the high level of demand as a license for shitting on the face of their customers instead. They know that even if they do that, many are still going to order. Yet, if BFL hasn't fucked up their chips, Avalon will be competing which a company that doesn't leave dark brown stains and a bad smell whenever you deal with them. Unless you troll them over boxes of fans.

Yes, there is no date and they have alluded to this in the newsletter.

Nice of them to be honest about their incompetence.

Anymore mis-representations for us?  Just because you are not happy doesn't mean you can make stuff up.   Be honest.

I don't think anyone really cares what I post about, but it's fun to aggressively take sides. There are enough with blind faith in Avalon (or paid off by them) on the other side to balance it out. Going by the thread title, you're basically expected to take a side.

[nathanrees19]

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

I found it very misleading and only a little bit amusing.

[organofcorti]

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

Bah! It was a bath-house scene and there was no sex. All tease and no payoff. Boring.

As an aside, what the hell is an "entitled person"? Is this a Google Translate fail, or else what exactly is it to which kano is entitled?

[SRoulette]

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

Bah! It was a bath-house scene and there was no sex. All tease and no payoff. Boring.

As an aside, what the hell is an "entitled person"? Is this a Google Translate fail, or else what exactly is it to which kano is entitled?

Self Entitled means He/ She feels something is owed to him, all the time from everyone.

In this context I was referring to his not very subtle demands

Give me an ASIC for free because I code cgminer !
No ? fine I will throw an e-tantrum and slander you.

[nathanrees19]

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

Bah! It was a bath-house scene and there was no sex. All tease and no payoff. Boring.

As an aside, what the hell is an "entitled person"? Is this a Google Translate fail, or else what exactly is it to which kano is entitled?

Self Entitled means He/ She feels something is owed to him, all the time from everyone.

In this context I was referring to his not very subtle demands

Give me an ASIC for free because I code cgminer !
No ? fine I will throw an e-tantrum and slander you.

No misrepresentation at all!

[kano]

...
In this context I was referring to his not very subtle demands

Give me an ASIC for free because I code cgminer !
No ? fine I will throw an e-tantrum and slander you.

And yet again a fucking retard making up something that doesn't even exist.

You are arguing against me and implying shit about me based on delusions.
Seriously, not jokingly. You are delusional.

Where did I ever say that bullshit you quoted?
The answer is never.
Quote me or fuck off.

Fucking hell, a bunch of losers trying to make an argument against me, failing and then deciding to make shit up to cover the fact that they are indeed a bunch of losers with no argument.
At least quote something real.

Damn, I've seen people quote me and remove content to make it seem different to what I said.
At least they had the intelligence to actually quote something I said (even if it was out of context).

But again, seriously, making up shit and implying I said it - total fail and total delusion.

[kano]

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

I found it very misleading and only a little bit amusing.

Actually I think it's quite amusing.
But I will add, that is all I see it as, an amusing quip against me to make me seem something I am not.

The problem is that this idiot SRoulette deludes himself that it's actually truthful ... in his own words
Based on? Nothing. He doesn't need to base anything he believes on reality, just someone said something funny, it must be true.

[PuertoLibre]

...
In this context I was referring to his not very subtle demands

Give me an ASIC for free because I code cgminer !
No ? fine I will throw an e-tantrum and slander you.

And yet again a fucking retard making up something that doesn't even exist.

You are arguing against me and implying shit about me based on delusions.
Seriously, not jokingly. You are delusional.

Where did I ever say that bullshit you quoted?
The answer is never.
Quote me or fuck off.

Fucking hell, a bunch of losers trying to make an argument against me, failing and then deciding to make shit up to cover the fact that they are indeed a bunch of losers with no argument.
At least quote something real.

Damn, I've seen people quote me and remove content to make it seem different to what I said.
At least they had the intelligence to actually quote something I said (even if it was out of context).

But again, seriously, making up shit and implying I said it - total fail and total delusion.

Sort of an Inaba-ism.

Step 1: Quote me or it ain't true!

Step 2: Then someone quotes it.

Step 3: Respond by saying something akin to "Uh! But! I didn't actually mean what you quoted! You are misinterpreting my words! This is what I actually meant you <insert expletives here>."

[PuertoLibre]

@ Kano

In the last page alone you re-established (just like before) that you wanted something from Bitsyncom.

You are throwing a tantrum every other page. Page 0 (I believe) was you commenting on sodomy being performed on Jeff Garzik because "you can't get him to do what you want him to do".

Page 1 through <too bored to flip through it> is about you pestering and harassing Bitsyncom. Around which point he tells you to "fuck off" more than once.

Every time you don't get your way your nasty side comes out. Especially if people don't do what you want or expect.

-------------------------

You demand I fetch proof when you've already repeated (yet again) what you did half a moon ago. You are very episodic and cyclical.

At this point you are just using this thread to convince others of a different narrative of what happened:

That it didn't actually mean what you said....and which you readily reinforce every other page when you get pissed off.

Well, you'll probably convince at least yourself if you don't keep losing your temper and lose it every other page.You seem to have convinced Nathan. So you seem to be working your way to a delusional fabric.

-------------------------

Look, if I just ask you very specific questions,and get very specific answers, I am pretty sure I can nail you on the points fairly easily. If you try to avoid being nailed, you'll either come out of it making very absurd contortions of your supposed meaning or you'll fail apically in the process.

[Askit2]

I see what Kan says a little differently. He and Con make CGMiner. It is their project. They fix things, improve things, and change things. Kano did state correctly that it is nearly impossible to actually test the fixes, improvements, and changes effect on Avalon without a test unit. Kano Could put in fixes that "Might" work but without testing Kano can't say they "Do" work.

As I remember it Kano asked for access to an Avalon (don't think he said shipped to him) for testing. Kano also asked for a copy of the changes made to CGMiner. All seemingly above board.

The problem seems to be that some people believe that they should make free money off Con and Kano's work. It is free software so you don't pay initially. Both developers work very hard to make CGMiner awesome. I personally really like it.

If Kano or Con have an issue with Avalon for:
(1) releasing with a version of CGMiner that wont stay up long enough without crashing.
(2) give no way for the actual DEVELOPERS to fix the issus. (No Source)
I see no issue with Kano and Con having and issue.

Their project is great. Bug fixes come out quickly after a bug is found. Changes are made to reduce CPU load and usually memory use frequently. The problem is without having a unit to write a driver using or source for a driver it is improbable that the bugfixes and updates will be available to Avalon customers.

If I had paid for an Avalon I would be pissed. The units require more power, are apparently impossible to ship outside of 2 people, and have no source code limiting the purchasers chance of getting access to the updates CGMiner puts out.

Maybe you can say Kano would like to have a unit for free. I would. Sadly when Kano gets a unit it isn't free. A unit shipped to Kano is a bill in that Kano spends time adding or fixing compatibility so that it will work optimally for CGMiner. Everyone that uses CGMiner gets the fruits of this labor. Not just Kano. Avalon customers would get very quickly to a unit running a stable release of CGMiner that wouldn't crash daily. Is it good for Avalon's customers to have a developer that will keep Avalon supported with the newest support. I think so. Would it be best to have a person that actually makes a large number of the changes to CGMiner's drivers able to actually test it before release. Again I think so.

Kano and Con had their project used in a for profit business. This is a fact. The source code is required to be released when said unit ships. Also a fact. The source code wasn't released then or at their next arbitrary date for release. Another fact. Essentially Con and Kano work for Avalon for free by supplying Avalons mining program. Without that miner it wouldn't work or Avalon would have had to make their own miner.

A bit off topic here but to possibly enlighten people to why I think Kano or Con might be deserving of some concideration.
When I was younger I had a competitve car stereo system. I selected the speakers, setup the amps and headunit. It was loud. When People rode with me I had only a couple of rules, 1 no country music, and 2 don't turn the volume up. You see I knew that my Subwoofer amp was a little hot for my subwoofers. I also knew where I could set the volume to witout melting voice coils. Now I could have dropped the sesitivity on the amp in question to make it impossible to actually damage the subwoofers but I didn't like the lack of balance. One day I had some friends riding with me and a person heard their favorite song. That person cranks up the volume and for less then 1 second the noise was deafening. (at the volume levels I usually ran it around 140+db) Then a pair of subwoofers stopped working all together. Once the proverbial somke cleared I had a bad attitude. See although I was planning on upgrading either way I hadn't saved the money up for the new Subwoofers. So I had months in front of me without the balanced sound I liked because someone played with a volume button.

More on topic You see Con and Kano can't fix a problem until it is located. Unlike in my story the CGMiner bugs are not normally located until a unit reaches a critical hashing rate or is put into a unit with very low memory. Now the Avalon units could work just fine but it will likely require Con and Kano to rewrite things. Their time is money. Now without a unit they can put out all the changes they want but it isn't a sure things that any changes will work with an Avalon. With an Avalon to test on the code in question would be easier to diagnose or at least check before releasing.

The part that makes me feel for both DEVs is that their project is floating out there not working like it should. This issue is compounded or will be when people start asking on the CGMiner thread for support for their Avalons. This free support likely won't be funded by Avalon. Now I am sure since Kano will help the guy doing the actual support it will be great. But I wouldn't call a DEV who by virtue of essentially stolen (violation of GPL) software is now required to help people get their expensive Avalons running greedy. He has given a lot of time to making peoples FPGA's and soon ASICS work. I bet he would get called worse asking for an hourly amount to fix problems for unsupported hardware too.

Now if it was my code I would likely be even more pissed. Someone going around castrating changes I made. Putting on a version that I know won't work correctly. And for the Coup de Gras that group forces me to support it for free. I would be livid. I would be incensed. I would likely say far worse then Kano has said. Possibly I would even say Avalon is not supported. But I am not involved. I just believe that Con and Kano are far underpaid for the work they do for essentially everyone.

[SRoulette]

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

I found it very misleading and only a little bit amusing.

Actually I think it's quite amusing.
But I will add, that is all I see it as, an amusing quip against me to make me seem something I am not.

The problem is that this idiot SRoulette deludes himself that it's actually truthful ... in his own words
Based on? Nothing. He doesn't need to base anything he believes on reality, just someone said something funny, it must be true.

If as you claim it is not true despite all evidence to the contrary you would have to agree that the characterization of you is indeed spot on.

[kano]

You are a rude unpleasant and entitled person, I felt the summary portrayed you in a humorous light very well while being truthful.

I found it very misleading and only a little bit amusing.

Actually I think it's quite amusing.
But I will add, that is all I see it as, an amusing quip against me to make me seem something I am not.

The problem is that this idiot SRoulette deludes himself that it's actually truthful ... in his own words
Based on? Nothing. He doesn't need to base anything he believes on reality, just someone said something funny, it must be true.

If as you claim it is not true despite all evidence to the contrary you would have to agree that the characterization of you is indeed spot on.

No evidence.

P.S. I've given up replying to the other git for now coz he keeps saying the same thing over and over and providing no actual proof.
Coz there is none.

[peetah]

Kano: I'll send you an Avalon for free. No strings attached. Based on the energy exerted on this thread, if half of it was used as positive energy on furthering the overall bitcoin cause, we're all gonna be winners. Now if you could pent up that energy for the meantime and save it for the future, we can take this thread out of the red.

[SRoulette]

Kano: I'll send you an Avalon for free. No strings attached. Based on the energy exerted on this thread, if half of it was used as positive energy on furthering the overall bitcoin cause, we're all gonna be winners. Now if you could pent up that energy for the meantime and save it for the future, we can take this thread out of the red.

peetah are you a member of avalon ?

If so that is an extremely generous offer and very nice to see

[kano]

Kano: I'll send you an Avalon for free. No strings attached. Based on the energy exerted on this thread, if half of it was used as positive energy on furthering the overall bitcoin cause, we're all gonna be winners. Now if you could pent up that energy for the meantime and save it for the future, we can take this thread out of the red.

Send it to ckolivas.
cgminer

[peetah]

Kano: I'll send you an Avalon for free. No strings attached. Based on the energy exerted on this thread, if half of it was used as positive energy on furthering the overall bitcoin cause, we're all gonna be winners. Now if you could pent up that energy for the meantime and save it for the future, we can take this thread out of the red.

peetah are you a member of avalon ?

If so that is an extremely generous offer and very nice to see

No. I'm just a buyer.

Compared to the landmark contributions made by both sides of the 'v.s.' to the community, I humbly admit I am indeed marginally generous 

[BitSyncom]

It's the weekend as promised, CNY is ending and shipping is going to resume shortly after, in the mean time before this we got organized ( not really organizing source code but things like how we didn't initially have the repos on github so there was other misc related work. )

Here are the source codes

https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer
https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer-openwrt-package
https://github.com/BitSyncom/avalon-extras
https://github.com/BitSyncom/luci

[creativex]

BRAVO! Thanx!

Any chance of a batch 2 order confirmation spree in the near future?

[BitSyncom]

BRAVO! Thanx!

Any chance of a batch 2 order confirmation spree in the near future?

yes, we are getting to that once we secure a shipping channel, many business like us has items in custom bottle neck as CNY ends, so we expect some problems once custom reopen when holidays are over, once that's taken cared of, we'll get to batch #2.

[SRoulette]

It's the weekend as promised, CNY is ending and shipping is going to resume shortly after, in the mean time before this we got organized ( not really organizing source code but things like how we didn't initially have the repos on github so there was other misc related work. )

Here are the source codes

https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer
https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer-openwrt-package
https://github.com/BitSyncom/avalon-extras
https://github.com/BitSyncom/luci

[creativex]

BRAVO! Thanx!

Any chance of a batch 2 order confirmation spree in the near future?

yes, we are getting to that once we secure a shipping channel, many business like us has items in custom bottle neck as CNY ends, so we expect some problems once custom reopen when holidays are over, once that's taken cared of, we'll get to batch #2.

Excellent, thanks.

Cheers.

[kano]

It's the weekend as promised, CNY is ending and shipping is going to resume shortly after, in the mean time before this we got organized ( not really organizing source code but things like how we didn't initially have the repos on github so there was other misc related work. )

Here are the source codes

https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer
https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer-openwrt-package
https://github.com/BitSyncom/avalon-extras
https://github.com/BitSyncom/luci

Finally - a week late on the last time given
Anyway, a few things:
1) You can only mine an avalon with it, you can't connect another device the way it currently is coded.
2) The mystical numbers that someone seemed to think they could use to discover the meaning of life: 256 270 282 300
The frequencies the avalon can run at.

Yeah is uses serial-USB as I said ... 'some' code in there from my Icarus code To be expected of course It is OpenSource ...... and it obviously started off as the Icarus code ... pity they removed the copyright of the people who wrote the original code it was copied from ... not surprising at all.

A lot of it will need to be rewritten, coz at the moment it simply recodes certain parts of cgminer to work with an avalon (and not anything else)
It will need to be done using the new scanwork() function that ckolivas is writing that allows a list of work items to be dealt with, and of course I've designed the new BFL SC code to work in a very different way with a separate thread to only get the replies from the device for dealing with the queue, but I'm not sure that can be used in this case since it is like an oversized Icarus where the timing between work completion and sending new work is critical (and WAY more critical due to the much lower time to work on a work item)
I'm certain it will have great difficulty if someone tried it on windows ... anyone with an Avalon wanna try that?
... anyone with an Avalon at all?

Edit: some interesting dates written on these pages
https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer-openwrt-package/commits/master
https://github.com/BitSyncom/luci/commits/master

[PuertoLibre]

It's the weekend as promised, CNY is ending and shipping is going to resume shortly after, in the mean time before this we got organized ( not really organizing source code but things like how we didn't initially have the repos on github so there was other misc related work. )

Here are the source codes

https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer
https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer-openwrt-package
https://github.com/BitSyncom/avalon-extras
https://github.com/BitSyncom/luci

And Kano just lost one more thing to hide behind when it comes to his complaints.

[nathanrees19]

It's the weekend as promised, CNY is ending and shipping is going to resume shortly after, in the mean time before this we got organized ( not really organizing source code but things like how we didn't initially have the repos on github so there was other misc related work. )

Here are the source codes

https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer
https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer-openwrt-package
https://github.com/BitSyncom/avalon-extras
https://github.com/BitSyncom/luci

Thanks. I did give Avalon a lot of shit about this, but the source release is much appreciated.

[nathanrees19]

And Kano just lost

I think everyone wanted this to be released. We all won.

[-ck]

It's the weekend as promised, CNY is ending and shipping is going to resume shortly after, in the mean time before this we got organized ( not really organizing source code but things like how we didn't initially have the repos on github so there was other misc related work. )

Here are the source codes

https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer
https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer-openwrt-package
https://github.com/BitSyncom/avalon-extras
https://github.com/BitSyncom/luci

Thanks for that.

In the condition that code is, I can't really merge it into the mainline cgminer code. I'm not sure what your long term plans are for your hardware, as to whether it will evolve further, run off other hardware, be manually update-able, etc, but you might at least benefit from trying to stay in sync with the master branch of cgminer, and if you made the code in such a way that it didn't just work on avalon hardware, it could be merged into cgminer master. Then it's possible others can add bugfixes, improvements etc. although these are hard to do without actually trying them directly on the hardware.

Please don't remove the copyright of authors who clearly contributed to the original versions of files you have copied and modified, such as from the Icarus code, to suit the Avalon hardware.

[wknight]

Thanks for that.

In the condition that code is, I can't really merge it into the mainline cgminer code. I'm not sure what your long term plans are for your hardware, as to whether it will evolve further, run off other hardware, be manually update-able, etc, but you might at least benefit from trying to stay in sync with the master branch of cgminer, and if you made the code in such a way that it didn't just work on avalon hardware, it could be merged into cgminer master. Then it's possible others can add bugfixes, improvements etc. although these are hard to do without actually trying them directly on the hardware.

Please don't remove the copyright of authors who clearly contributed to the original versions of files you have copied and modified, such as from the Icarus code, to suit the Avalon hardware.

Very well written and this is why I continue to support the cgminer software. Working together is going to be huge success for Bitcoin in general. Glad to see this finally coming around.

Nice job guys.

[wknight]

BRAVO! Thanx!

Any chance of a batch 2 order confirmation spree in the near future?

Im really not sure what more confirmation you need for batch 2 orders? It has already been mentioned to contact Walletbit to verify any order through there system at http://support.walletbit.com.

Im not sure what else your looking for besides an email thats going to say the same thing Walletbit can already answer?

I would rather Avalon to focus on the last of the Batch 1 shipments and get started on Batch 2. And or patching their software to be up-to-date with cgminer.

Last night on Freenode #cgminer I saw a lot of great suggestions from Kanoi to update the code. Also willing to help out.

[08:38]  * xiangfu got an avalon today.
[08:46]  <kanoi> you see our comments - your gonna have to rewrite a lot of the code coz your current code is avalon only
[08:47]  <kanoi> maybe redo it once we've got the new replacement scanhash done
[08:47]  <xiangfu> kanoi: yes. thanks for comments. :-)
[08:47]  <kanoi> ... and of course use new usbutils
[08:47]  <kanoi> ... and put the copyright back ...
[08:47]  <xiangfu> I don't have much time write those code. so I just try to make it work with avalon.
[08:48]  <kanoi> until conman completes the new scanhash - no point anyway
[08:48]  <kanoi> for now just put in the bug fixes
[08:49]  <xiangfu> kanoi: about coypright. I think I almost rewrite 90% of driver-icarus.c. is that ok I change the coypright to only me. (just for understand those mess copyright stuff)
[08:49]  <kanoi> no
[08:49]  <xiangfu> sure I will add all copyright back.
[08:49]  <xiangfu> kanoi: ok. so for copyright I have to 100% re-write? right?
[08:50]  <kanoi> well if you don't I'm just Luke-Jr will get pissed off also
[08:51]  <kanoi> as was before all 3 (inculding you) put your name at the top
[08:52]  <xiangfu> is that very important? the top. I alwasy want get away from those copyright. so now I am always release my code with unlicense(http://unlicense.org/)
[08:53]  <kanoi> no you cannot change the copyright
[08:56]  <xiangfu> thanks for comments. fixed: https://github.com/BitSyncom/cgminer/commit/5e28e87e20b45adcf85eeef6ac47621d1d2d5f6c
[08:58]  <kanoi> you might want to write: Copyright 2012-2013 Xiangfu <xiangfu@openmobilefree.com>
[08:58]  <kanoi> and put it at the top
[08:58]  <xiangfu> forget that. I just copy from icarus.c
[09:03]  * e1z0 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.3.1 Aria http://www.kvirc.net/)
[09:07]  <kanoi> anyway - when you have time (and after I get back from BFL - I'm going in 12 hours) I can explain how to use the new USB library - basically look at driver-bitforce.c in my git -> hotplug
[09:08]  <kanoi> but that will require a major rewrite - so up to you if you have time or not
[09:09]  <xiangfu> thanks kanoi. I do want upstream the avalon code.
[09:10]  <kanoi> but also you'll have to wait until conman does the new scanhash - coz you'll need to use that
[09:10]  <xiangfu> yes. depends on time. I will always in this channel. just I have the work need to be done this month.
[09:10]  <xiangfu> I will read your code recently.
[09:10]  <kanoi> but that shoul dbe ready soon (well he's done the basics already - not sure what else needs to be done yet)
[09:11]  <kanoi> in his branch ... not sure where
[09:11]  <kanoi> queued_work
[09:12]  <kanoi> nothing uses it yet
[09:12]  <kanoi> anywa 2am - sleep time - see ya - Zzzzzzzzzzzzz
[09:14]  <xiangfu> n8

[Syke]

It's the weekend as promised, CNY is ending and shipping is going to resume shortly after

Do you think you'll be able to ship more than 2 units this time?

[creativex]

BRAVO! Thanx!

Any chance of a batch 2 order confirmation spree in the near future?

Im really not sure what more confirmation you need for batch 2 orders? It has already been mentioned to contact Walletbit to verify any order through there system at http://support.walletbit.com.

In order for there to be more confirmation, there would have to be some kind of initial confirmation.

I've never received confirmation of anything from either walletbit or Avalon, save automated confirmation of opening a support ticket weeks ago. Emails sent to walletbit are seemingly going into a black hole. I paid as a guest, so have only a screenshot of the receipt and blockchain.info as proof it happened, nothing shows in my walletbit account. Support tickets opened, auto receipt acknowledged then ignored. If I go to the recently altered batch 2 store and login, it says there's no record of any transactions.

Calling their customer service crap is patently unfair to dung.