Kano vs Bitsyncom

[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.