biggest profit for miner devs not miners

[jwarren81]

This isn't a high horse, this is basic social behavior that should be the norm.  Exactly, you can do what you want when you want, right up to the point you violate someone else rights. Stealing their work because you think they have made enough off of it is ridiculous.  You can try to justify it all you want, but in the end you are wrong and immoral for thinking its ok to do.

You obviously didn't follow that copyright situation to completion.  He included the license statement he was required to as soon as his mistake was pointed out.  Case closed.  That's how that copyright works, and copyrights are only worth something if they are defended, which it was, and both Claymore and the dev came to amicable terms.  People like you were the only ones outraged about something that had nothing to do with you.  You sound like a social justice warrior and its pretty sad.

Its this kind of thinking that is outright wrong.  You are not entitled to someone else's work!  Even if you have the skills to circumvent their pay scheme.  It is just plain wrong and immoral.  Do you think people are entitled to a carpenters work? A plumbers?  Most people don't have those skills either?  This type of mind set is whats going wrong in the world.  The amount of money someone is making has NOTHING to do with you.  You have the freedom to NOT use his product.  You do NOT have the right to use his product without compensating him in the way he requires for his work.  No matter how much he wants to charge.  If you don't think the product is worth the 2% fee then don't use it.  There are many alternatives as people have pointed out.  Its ridiculous for people to justify their wrong doing with "well he makes enough so I can steal his shit".

I don't understand this at all but if you have the skills to use the software without paying I have no problem with that - Claymore is already making way more than is really reasonable from people who don't have those skills.

Oh get off your high horse. I do what I want, when I want and how I want. If you want to talk morals, Claymore took OPEN SOURCE miners, tweaked them a little and released them as closed-source. Depending on the licenses of the original works it might not even be legal for him to release it without the source and without containing any copyright notices of the original works he made a derivate of. Where's your outrage there?

cK'

[coke]

This isn't a high horse, this is basic social behavior that should be the norm.  Exactly, you can do what you want when you want, right up to the point you violate someone else rights. Stealing their work because you think they have made enough off of it is ridiculous.  You can try to justify it all you want, but in the end you are wrong and immoral for thinking its ok to do.

You obviously didn't follow that copyright situation to completion.  He included the license statement he was required to as soon as his mistake was pointed out.  Case closed.  That's how that copyright works, and copyrights are only worth something if they are defended, which it was, and both Claymore and the dev came to amicable terms.  People like you were the only ones outraged about something that had nothing to do with you.  You sound like a social justice warrior and its pretty sad.

Its this kind of thinking that is outright wrong.  You are not entitled to someone else's work!  Even if you have the skills to circumvent their pay scheme.  It is just plain wrong and immoral.  Do you think people are entitled to a carpenters work? A plumbers?  Most people don't have those skills either?  This type of mind set is whats going wrong in the world.  The amount of money someone is making has NOTHING to do with you.  You have the freedom to NOT use his product.  You do NOT have the right to use his product without compensating him in the way he requires for his work.  No matter how much he wants to charge.  If you don't think the product is worth the 2% fee then don't use it.  There are many alternatives as people have pointed out.  Its ridiculous for people to justify their wrong doing with "well he makes enough so I can steal his shit".

I don't understand this at all but if you have the skills to use the software without paying I have no problem with that - Claymore is already making way more than is really reasonable from people who don't have those skills.

Oh get off your high horse. I do what I want, when I want and how I want. If you want to talk morals, Claymore took OPEN SOURCE miners, tweaked them a little and released them as closed-source. Depending on the licenses of the original works it might not even be legal for him to release it without the source and without containing any copyright notices of the original works he made a derivate of. Where's your outrage there?

cK'

I am not outraged at all and to be honest didn't even know about any previous copyright disputes.

Calling me names really isn't nice, you should be careful not to get banned.
But go on with your hissy-fit, it is quite amusing to me. Maybe I will release my proxy with a 0.5% fee just to make you wet your pants even more.

cK'

[Biodom]

Here's something to add to the speculation over Claymore's income:
https://etherscan.io/address/0x726653b871b5a3010441e0dec37e08afceb2fb05

It looks like he's getting about $10K/day, which is about 0.7% of all ETH mining rewards (about $1.5 million per day).

yeah old news  and he truly has scored a fortune.

I have told him time and time again  drop fees

he could do 1 and .5  he does  2.5 and 2.0

I don't mine with his software that much.

his fee is actually 1% with -mode 1 (eth only).
EWBF fee on zec is 2% for NVIDIA miner, but that miner is very stable, I like it the most.
Optiminer/Linux on AMD is good/stable as well when you find correct pci-mode, fee 1% or so.

[jwarren81]

Glad you are amused.  I'm enjoying the discussion; its really the best way to see where people stand and what their principals are.

I didn't really see any name calling though, just descriptions of what I see, so I'm not sure what you are referring to.

This isn't a high horse, this is basic social behavior that should be the norm.  Exactly, you can do what you want when you want, right up to the point you violate someone else rights. Stealing their work because you think they have made enough off of it is ridiculous.  You can try to justify it all you want, but in the end you are wrong and immoral for thinking its ok to do.

You obviously didn't follow that copyright situation to completion.  He included the license statement he was required to as soon as his mistake was pointed out.  Case closed.  That's how that copyright works, and copyrights are only worth something if they are defended, which it was, and both Claymore and the dev came to amicable terms.  People like you were the only ones outraged about something that had nothing to do with you.  You sound like a social justice warrior and its pretty sad.

Its this kind of thinking that is outright wrong.  You are not entitled to someone else's work!  Even if you have the skills to circumvent their pay scheme.  It is just plain wrong and immoral.  Do you think people are entitled to a carpenters work? A plumbers?  Most people don't have those skills either?  This type of mind set is whats going wrong in the world.  The amount of money someone is making has NOTHING to do with you.  You have the freedom to NOT use his product.  You do NOT have the right to use his product without compensating him in the way he requires for his work.  No matter how much he wants to charge.  If you don't think the product is worth the 2% fee then don't use it.  There are many alternatives as people have pointed out.  Its ridiculous for people to justify their wrong doing with "well he makes enough so I can steal his shit".

I don't understand this at all but if you have the skills to use the software without paying I have no problem with that - Claymore is already making way more than is really reasonable from people who don't have those skills.

Oh get off your high horse. I do what I want, when I want and how I want. If you want to talk morals, Claymore took OPEN SOURCE miners, tweaked them a little and released them as closed-source. Depending on the licenses of the original works it might not even be legal for him to release it without the source and without containing any copyright notices of the original works he made a derivate of. Where's your outrage there?

cK'

I am not outraged at all and to be honest didn't even know about any previous copyright disputes.

Calling me names really isn't nice, you should be careful not to get banned.
But go on with your hissy-fit, it is quite amusing to me. Maybe I will release my proxy with a 0.5% fee just to make you wet your pants even more.

cK'

[coke]

Glad you are amused.  I'm enjoying the discussion; its really the best way to see where people stand and what their principals are.

I didn't really see any name calling though, just descriptions of what I see, so I'm not sure what you are referring to.

Ah so an insult is no longer an insult if you preface it with "You sound like a ...", good to know.

But really, I'm done with you, this is not a discussion, this is you throwing a fit and calling me names.
You don't like me, I don't like you, 'nuff said.

cK'

[Tmdz]

The problem is the lack of morals between closed source and open source devs.  That is to say open source devs are trying to develop new ideas that will benefit everyone, while closed source will only benefit themselves by finical gain.

Closed source miners can take those ideas and use them or improve them then sell it in their own software, while legal is still a big moral problem.  People won't benefit from this kind of function and it will impede growth or force people to depend on the work from the most successful closed source.  So you end up with a situation where people no longer want to contribute to open source being they know their work will be used by someone else for greed.

[doktor83]

It's stupid to say that claymore took open source miner, modified it a LITTLE, then released his own.
He proved that he is good at what he is doing a million times.

[jwarren81]

So let me get this straight, someone gives away their work for free and expressly for anyone to use (within the license they release it under); and someone uses that work, adding their own work to it, that allows thousands of people to profit from it; but its wrong for that person to want some compensation for their work?  One chose to work for free, the other chose to charge a market based fee?  A fee that people willingly pay because its worth it?

I'm not sure if you know this but Microsoft is one of the largest contributors to the open source community, including to Linux.  That pretty much proves your premise wrong.  You CAN have it both ways, people can make money from closed source as well as open source.  There are massive company's that make money based on open source software as their core.  Greed doesn't even enter into this.  Its simply good business.  There is nothing stopping any of those open source developers from making their version better than Claymore's and releasing it for free (or for a fee).  They chose to work on the project for no compensation; someone else profiting from it has zero effect on them.  They can continue on as they wish.

The problem is the lack of morals between closed source and open source devs.  That is to say open source devs are trying to develop new ideas that will benefit everyone, while closed source will only benefit themselves by finical gain.

Closed source miners can take those ideas and use them or improve them then sell it in their own software, while legal is still a big moral problem.  People won't benefit from this kind of function and it will impede growth or force people to depend on the work from the most successful closed source.  So you end up with a situation where people no longer want to contribute to open source being they know their work will be used by someone else for greed.

[KaydenC]

Good for miner devs having a valuable skill. If you have monopoly over a product, in this case the fastest mining software, why wouldn't you set your price such that you have maximum gain? The fee should be as large as possible without causing public outcry, and small enough that only a low percentage of users bother finding workarounds to avoid fees.

Next, creating the fastest miner is difficult work and requires years of experience in specific roles, not cookie cutter info from programming books. If claymore includes his miners in his resume , the right employer will pay him a lot.

However I am surprised very few developers try to make their own miners. The monetary incentive should be enough. Either large farms are paying them more, their job pays 7 digits ,or they know they can't beat the current miners.

[64dimensions]

Oh get off your high horse. I do what I want, when I want and how I want. If you want to talk morals, Claymore took OPEN SOURCE miners, tweaked them a little and released them as closed-source. Depending on the licenses of the original works it might not even be legal for him to release it without the source and without containing any copyright notices of the original works he made a derivate of. Where's your outrage there?

cK'
[/quote]

Your argument is lame for several reasons. In the big picture, CM and all mining software providers, provides a service:

0) For miners, the mining software is a mission critical requirement. Even with free open source software there is a maintaining cost.

1) If you bother to read any of the CM miner threads, CM frequently incorporates suggested user changes/requirements. In a normal S/W development effort this would require some sort of costed out change order(s).

2) Unlike the real world, you don't pay extra if the mining software you need is ported to a newly released card.

3) It's in CM's financial interest to keep the mining software competitive with what is offered to large commercial installations.

4) I can't even imagine what the hourly cost would be to contract out to this software development to someone who needs coding + GPU assembly language + crypto coin programming experience.

5) People are already paying pools for providing a service as well as companies such as nicehash.

6) The cost of going from BTC to fiat is something that you really should be complaining about.


There is the opposite tack, I would like to see more features for the money:

a) I like Nerdralph's idea of mining software focused on energy efficiency. I'm always on the lookout for such solutions.

b) I would like to see an open market on GPU bio's instead of this hush/hush PM stuff. I would have no problem paying 1% for a top energy GPU efficient bios that was validated by mining software. Why can't the bios and mining software be an integrated system.

c) Finally, with summer coming, I would like to see some sort of option in the mining software based on time-of-day use for individual GPUs. There would be many good things about this:

i) Instead of trying to do this through the O/S, doing it through the mining software makes this feature platform independent.
ii) Energy hog GPU's could be shutdown during the hours of day when the electricity rates are high.
iii) It's probably more efficient to completely shut down/idle individual cards to limit heating/consumption than for all the GPU's to throttle back.

[coke]

Oh get off your high horse. I do what I want, when I want and how I want. If you want to talk morals, Claymore took OPEN SOURCE miners, tweaked them a little and released them as closed-source. Depending on the licenses of the original works it might not even be legal for him to release it without the source and without containing any copyright notices of the original works he made a derivate of. Where's your outrage there?

cK'

Your argument is lame for several reasons. In the big picture, CM and all mining software providers, provides a service:

0) For miners, the mining software is a mission critical requirement. Even with free open source software there is a maintaining cost.

1) If you bother to read any of the CM miner threads, CM frequently incorporates suggested user changes/requirements. In a normal S/W development effort this would require some sort of costed out change order(s).

2) Unlike the real world, you don't pay extra if the mining software you need is ported to a newly released card.

3) It's in CM's financial interest to keep the mining software competitive with what is offered to large commercial installations.

4) I can't even imagine what the hourly cost would be to contract out to this software development to someone who needs coding + GPU assembly language + crypto coin programming experience.

5) People are already paying pools for providing a service as well as companies such as nicehash.

6) The cost of going from BTC to fiat is something that you really should be complaining about.

[/quote]

I'm not a big fan of this whole software as a service, it's the modern version of rent-seeking. Basically getting paid for breathing instead of just selling the software for a fixed upfront price.

As it is now, everybody is rent-seeking from miners. In addition to the upfront cost of the mining equipment and the running costs in electricity _AND_ pool fees, miner devs now also want in on it. You guys are aware that without miners there's no PoW coins, right? So either sell your software for an upfront price or don't whine if people work around it. (btw, I'm not a freeloader, I paid fees for months before I decided it was enough)

I'm not saying CM did a bad job or that he doesn't deserve fair compensation for his work, just some people have a weird interpretation of fair.

cK'

[Prelude]

Couldn't agree with you more, jwarren88. Everyone wants a free lunch. People like coke are a big part of what is wrong with society.

[Prelude]

And who the hell are you to decide what's fair for claymore?  You're just trying to justify being a shitty theiving person. No one's buying the bullshit you're peddling.

[coke]

And who the hell are you to decide what's fair for claymore?  You're just trying to justify being a shitty theiving person. No one's buying the bullshit you're peddling.

Ah here we go again with the name calling and temper tantrums.
I decided what's fair for ME, don't like it? Well tough cookies, suck it up buttercup.

I'm not trying to justify anything, not peddling anything. I replied to the OP, it wasn't really an invitation for trolling but keep it up.

cK'

[nerdralph]

And who the hell are you to decide what's fair for claymore?  You're just trying to justify being a shitty theiving person. No one's buying the bullshit you're peddling.

Ah here we go again with the name calling and temper tantrums.
I decided what's fair for ME, don't like it? Well tough cookies, suck it up buttercup.

I'm not trying to justify anything, not peddling anything. I replied to the OP, it wasn't really an invitation for trolling but keep it up.

cK'

I'm now wishing I made this a self-moderated thread...  It's too late for that but if the trolls do keep it up I'll lock it.

[nerdralph]

a) I like Nerdralph's idea of mining software focused on energy efficiency. I'm always on the lookout for such solutions.

b) I would like to see an open market on GPU bio's instead of this hush/hush PM stuff. I would have no problem paying 1% for a top energy GPU efficient bios that was validated by mining software. Why can't the bios and mining software be an integrated system.

c) Finally, with summer coming, I would like to see some sort of option in the mining software based on time-of-day use for individual GPUs. There would be many good things about this:

i) Instead of trying to do this through the O/S, doing it through the mining software makes this feature platform independent.
ii) Energy hog GPU's could be shutdown during the hours of day when the electricity rates are high.
iii) It's probably more efficient to completely shut down/idle individual cards to limit heating/consumption than for all the GPU's to throttle back.

Regarding b), I've released my strapmod utility and and made an online version available.  The next step as you've suggested is integrating the timing mods into the miner (I've been experimenting with this idea for about a week now).

Regarding c), I think it's more the domain of mining management software.

[drrobert]

why you don't use sgminer-gm that it is open source (then you can edit and upgrade it) if you dont wanna pay fee to claymore ?

[nerdralph]

why you don't use sgminer-gm that it is open source (then you can edit and upgrade it) if you dont wanna pay fee to claymore ?

If you paid attention to my other posts you'd know I'm already using sgminer-gm.  For Hawaii, it's faster than Claymore.

[Ademen]

What really surprises me is that there is probably a dozen or so miner devs that can make similar software and charge 0.5% less and take a huge portion of his revenue; however many choose not too.

Any reason for that?

[drrobert]

why you don't use sgminer-gm that it is open source (then you can edit and upgrade it) if you dont wanna pay fee to claymore ?

If you paid attention to my other posts you'd know I'm already using sgminer-gm.  For Hawaii, it's faster than Claymore.

And about last 470 / 480 who much it is difference? maybe it fee it is same performance.