Bitcoin Forum
December 16, 2018, 02:36:14 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.0 [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Efudd's Z9/Mini Fuddware v2.1c / PS4 Contest through 12/24!  (Read 11528 times)
dtawom
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 06, 2018, 10:55:17 PM
 #501

Anyone else experiencing major differences between reported hashrate in miner status and reported hashrate on pool sites.  I've been seeing 10-12k differences at least 2 or 3 times a day on my Z9 for a while now and this comes out to more like a 20% dev fee than a 1% dev fee.  I installed the firmware on two of my z9 mini's and I frequently see hashrates 1-4K below what is reported in the miner status.
I've attached some screenshots.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eC8Rtr2yN2LFYf2wqVOX_RBktnRkf8jj
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1G046dJOZKtAdRK1wlGFbxS93qF9Q3nrQ

**Update:  I'm trying 2.1c firmware on the Z9 now after reading some recent posts, but I already have 2.1c on the Z9 mini where I'm noticing up to 20% dependencies.***
**Update2: Nevermind I definitely had 2.1c firmware on Z9 already, it just doesn't list it at the top of the page in System Summary it just says 2.1**

I asked about this in a PM, but got no response.  Is the option still available to be a paid user?  I would rather pay a lump sum and avoid the dev fee and possible bugs making it larger than the 3.67%.  People have 1% in mind because at one point in this post or in the firmware notes it did say 1%.  I don't know when that changed, but somewhere in some description you definitely listed 1% as the dev fee.
1544927774
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544927774

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544927774
Reply with quote  #2

1544927774
Report to moderator
1544927774
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544927774

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544927774
Reply with quote  #2

1544927774
Report to moderator
1544927774
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544927774

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544927774
Reply with quote  #2

1544927774
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1544927774
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1544927774

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1544927774
Reply with quote  #2

1544927774
Report to moderator
efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 06, 2018, 11:30:21 PM
 #502

Anyone else experiencing major differences between reported hashrate in miner status and reported hashrate on pool sites.  I've been seeing 10-12k differences at least 2 or 3 times a day on my Z9 for a while now and this comes out to more like a 20% dev fee than a 1% dev fee.  I installed the firmware on two of my z9 mini's and I frequently see hashrates 1-4K below what is reported in the miner status.
I've attached some screenshots.




**Update:  I'm trying 2.1c firmware on the Z9 now after reading some recent posts, but I already have 2.1c on the Z9 mini where I'm noticing up to 20% dependencies.***
**Update2: Nevermind I definitely had 2.1c firmware on Z9 already, it just doesn't list it at the top of the page in System Summary it just says 2.1**

I asked about this in a PM, but got no response.  Is the option still available to be a paid user?  I would rather pay a lump sum and avoid the dev fee and possible bugs making it larger than the 3.67%.  People have 1% in mind because at one point in this post or in the firmware notes it did say 1%.  I don't know when that changed, but somewhere in some description you definitely listed 1% as the dev fee.


dtawom, you PMd me on 11/08/2018 asking if I would sell you firmware and if I had a mini version available. I apologize, I did not respond, that was an oversight on my part. At that point in time, I did not have a mini version available and I have not sold a version for minis.

The only mention, ever, of 1% was very early on when I asked about sold vs. dev. This was months back.

As far as pool differences go, I use flypool for some machines -- their averages are calculated over 15 minutes if memory serves. It doesn't always show correctly. That said, mine end up matching on long averages.

What do you mean "up to 20% dependencies" -- if you think I am taking 20% from you, please uninstall immediately. Simple as that.

If you are having issues or otherwise think I'm taking something from you that I have not disclosed, please uninstall the firmware. Simple as that. From the very moment I posted a "dev fee" supported release, I described  *exactly* the sequence of events and  *exactly* the timing. I've been clear on the calculations and have not hidden anything.

The firmware is *NOT* mining more than 10 minutes out of every 290 minutes total. It is *NOT* mining more than 49.65 minutes a day in the dev pool. It is *NOT* 1%, and it is *NOT* 3.6%. 49.65/1440 = 3.44%. How do I know this? I'm running the exact same firmware on test machines and am watching this like a hawk -- it's possible I have made mistakes, but every time someone has stated the timing is more than I've stated, I've been able to show timestamps +/- 10 seconds from what I've stated are the calculations.

I'm ok with pitchforks, but please contact me with your  *SUPPORT ID* from your summary page. If you don't, there is simply no way that I can help.

Jason


efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 06, 2018, 11:48:11 PM
 #503

Effective immediately, the dev fee has been dropped from 3.4% to 3%. The miner will now mine for 10 minutes out of every 330 minutes.

10 for dev, 320 for you, repeat.

1440 minutes per day / 330 minutes (320+10 minute cycle) = 4.36. 4.36*10 minute cycle = 43.6 minutes. 43.6/1440 = 3.02% dev fee.

This change will occur automatically after the next dev cycle on your systems.

I will also be updating the firmware soon(tm) to very clearly tell you when the dev fee starts and when it ends in the messages file, along with the duration, so there is no question.

thank you,

jason

chipless
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 1


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 02:52:52 AM
 #504

Jason

I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….

How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?

If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?

You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.

What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.

We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.

What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?

Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair,  I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.

lceman11
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 03:03:27 AM
 #505


For the record, 10 minutes dev and 280 minutes normal is 3.4%, not 1%. I never claimed 1%. I’m just getting home now and will look to investigate this shortly. It is 49.6 minutes a day.

Iceman, if you can PM me your supportID it would be great also. What 2.1c primarily changes is simply to ensure that it returns to the proper pool after the dev-fee. There were circumstances where it could return to one of your other pools instead. It was literally a one line change for that since I had some logic reversed accidentally.

Nothing else was changed that would match what you are seeing, for what it is is worth.

-jason

Smiley and I never said you did - I actually wasn't even paying attention to what it was supposed to be I just simply noticed the oddities on the z-farm and started looking into whats going on. When I mentioned 1% I simply wanted to say that I am not accusing you in dishonesty - my apologies if that didn't come out right. So..... like I mentioned in my post I set 5 big ones and 5 small ones on 2.1c to run on equihash overnight- disabled all custom scripts, rules etc. on awesome miner side. The only one I left running was a script that checks the pool after disconnect and if it is not correct one it switches it via SSH. I choose equihash just for the reason that it is the most screwy one with a lot of disconnects and rejects. The dev fee came out to be 4.11% http://www.u-ok.net/images1/miningrep1.png Looking through  some of the logs I can see that a few times miners got socket error and when reconcted they came to the pool that is specified in the first row of the set up thats is the reason you see a few other pools beside nicehash. One thing I can say for sure that the issue with not returning to the last pool mined on after dev cycle is definitely fixed and it doesn't matter if last pool was switched to using SSH command or it was just a default set up. Now it works the way it should. I will set the same bunch to run 24 hours on the luckpool mining hash this time - that should be much more stable compare to nicehash and will post results again tomorrow.  I know you guys talked about temps and hash rate so here are a few graphs (2 big ones and 2 small ones on 2.1.c) that displays hash rate vs temperature. If anyone is interested i can post a larger sample which will have less spikes and easier to see correlation between two.http://www.u-ok.net/images1/perf1.png http://www.u-ok.net/images1/perf2.png http://www.u-ok.net/images1/perf3.png http://www.u-ok.net/images1/perf4.png
efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 04:07:06 AM
 #506

Jason

I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….

How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?

If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?

You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.

What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.

We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.

What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?

Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair,  I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.



Chipless, thank you for voicing your concerns. Please use your own firmware and not mine. If you would like to buy a license, the price is one beeeelioon dollars. Special, just for you. Also, all other firmware features are designed to spy on your toaster. Not everyone else’s, just yours.

The rest of your math is just wrong, again, by a lot.

Jason

efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 04:17:15 AM
 #507


For the record, 10 minutes dev and 280 minutes normal is 3.4%, not 1%. I never claimed 1%. I’m just getting home now and will look to investigate this shortly. It is 49.6 minutes a day.

Iceman, if you can PM me your supportID it would be great also. What 2.1c primarily changes is simply to ensure that it returns to the proper pool after the dev-fee. There were circumstances where it could return to one of your other pools instead. It was literally a one line change for that since I had some logic reversed accidentally.

Nothing else was changed that would match what you are seeing, for what it is is worth.

-jason

Smiley and I never said you did - I actually wasn't even paying attention to what it was supposed to be I just simply noticed the oddities on the z-farm and started looking into whats going on. When I mentioned 1% I simply wanted to say that I am not accusing you in dishonesty - my apologies if that didn't come out right. So..... like I mentioned in my post I set 5 big ones and 5 small ones on 2.1c to run on equihash overnight- disabled all custom scripts, rules etc. on awesome miner side. The only one I left running was a script that checks the pool after disconnect and if it is not correct one it switches it via SSH. I choose equihash just for the reason that it is the most screwy one with a lot of disconnects and rejects. The dev fee came out to be 4.11%  Looking through  some of the logs I can see that a few times miners got socket error and when reconcted they came to the pool that is specified in the first row of the set up thats is the reason you see a few other pools beside nicehash. One thing I can say for sure that the issue with not returning to the last pool mined on after dev cycle is definitely fixed and it doesn't matter if last pool was switched to using SSH command or it was just a default set up. Now it works the way it should. I will set the same bunch to run 24 hours on the luckpool mining hash this time - that should be much more stable compare to nicehash and will post results again tomorrow.  I know you guys talked about temps and hash rate so here are a few graphs (2 big ones and 2 small ones on 2.1.c) that displays hash rate vs temperature. If anyone is interested i can post a larger sample which will have less spikes and easier to see correlation between two.

Is “usage” there based on time or shares submitted? Also, are you using Nicehash and Z units? If so, that will be a significant waste of your shares. I’m on my mobile and don’t really want to try to type up the explanation on the small keyboard. Smiley

Also, can you please provide a support Id and your logs so I can understand these socket errors? (Hey chip, see how I keep asking for logs? Hint, I don’t have them).

Jason

rpg101
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 04:22:05 AM
 #508

Have you converted jstefanop voltage regulator to z9? I looked at the driver and is not the sam (I also don't have ARM gear to compile the code)
efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 04:26:22 AM
 #509

Have you converted jstefanop voltage regulator to z9? I looked at the driver and is not the sam (I also don't have ARM gear to compile the code)

Nope, I have not.

rpg101
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 04:44:27 AM
 #510

i2c is on the sys/bus but not on the /dev. The VRM is the cause of the low performance for sure
chipless
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 1


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 04:49:05 AM
 #511

Jason

I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….

How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?

If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?

You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.

What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.

We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.

What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?

Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair,  I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.



Chipless, thank you for voicing your concerns. Please use your own firmware and not mine. If you would like to buy a license, the price is one beeeelioon dollars. Special, just for you. Also, all other firmware features are designed to spy on your toaster. Not everyone else’s, just yours.

The rest of your math is just wrong, again, by a lot.

Jason



Since you fail to answer the questions I will take it as you have something to hide. As I said to you before I have been up and down this road with gpu mining software the coders not willing to answer legitimate questions. The math ain't wrong my miners make about 3.50 an hour therefore if you add up the dev fees for almost an hour it adds up to a lot of dev fees collected if you have a large number of users.

Quit being a baby about me releasing a fix for the batch 4 minis fan and temp problem when using batch 1 firmware. I guess you have to ride your train while you can because yours wont be the only one available forever others will come out with releases with the same features as yours.
You don't seem to like anyone who calls you out on some topics of your firmware.
efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 04:57:27 AM
 #512

...snip...

Since you fail to answer the questions I will take it as you have something to hide. As I said to you before I have been up and down this road with gpu mining software the coders not willing to answer legitimate questions. The math ain't wrong my miners make about 3.50 an hour therefore if you add up the dev fees for almost an hour it adds up to a lot of dev fees collected if you have a large number of users.

Quit being a baby about me releasing a fix for the batch 4 minis fan and temp problem when using batch 1 firmware. I guess you have to ride your train while you can because yours wont be the only one available forever others will come out with releases with the same features as yours.
You don't seem to like anyone who calls you out on some topics of your firmware.

Take it however you want, I don’t care. If you are making 3.50 an hour with mining, you make more than I do.

I have already answered some of your questions previous times you have asked. I am not going to tell you how my stuff works. Use it or don’t. Since you have never shared a supportID you have not had the pleasure of me sharing what is logged. Those who I have had to support have seen the raw logs where appropriate so your accusations of impropriety are unfounded, and as usual with your statements, just wrong.

Please keep harassing me, I enjoy it.

Jason

chipless
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 1


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 05:15:03 AM
 #513

Jason

I have some concern about your firmware that should have some answers to. The big questions are ….

How much control do you have over the miners with your firmware?

If the miner cant reach your callback server does it still stop the miner from starting?

You have the ability to change dev mode on the fly as well as some other features so I am sure you have the ability to do other things with the miner.

What features are implemented that the user does not know about yet that could take control of the miner or its settings.

We know you are collecting data from the miners or you wouldn't be able to look at your logs and see what is going on.

What information are you gathering from the miners during the callbacks?

Lastly it was nice of you to reduce the dev fee but with my rate here at home that is about 3.50 a day going to you, making it over 100 a month going to you, but you were willing to sell the license for 1 zec. Don't you think the dev fee is still a little high since you were willing to sell a license for 1 zec. When you got everyone hooked on your firmware you said you were gonna offer a license then once you seen the volume of people you decided to go dev mode only right now. So if you have a 1000 miners with your fw you are making about 3000+ dollars a day. Don't you think reducing the dev fee to 1 or 1.5% is a little more fair,  I realize you need to recover the cost of ida and a z9 but at this rate you have recovered that cost in a few days and even the best coders don't make 20k a week for their work.



Chipless, thank you for voicing your concerns. Please use your own firmware and not mine. If you would like to buy a license, the price is one beeeelioon dollars. Special, just for you. Also, all other firmware features are designed to spy on your toaster. Not everyone else’s, just yours.

The rest of your math is just wrong, again, by a lot.

Jason



Since you fail to answer the questions I will take it as you have something to hide. As I said to you before I have been up and down this road with gpu mining software the coders not willing to answer legitimate questions. The math ain't wrong my miners make about 3.50 an hour therefore if you add up the dev fees for almost an hour it adds up to a lot of dev fees collected if you have a large number of users.

Quit being a baby about me releasing a fix for the batch 4 minis fan and temp problem when using batch 1 firmware. I guess you have to ride your train while you can because yours wont be the only one available forever others will come out with releases with the same features as yours.
You don't seem to like anyone who calls you out on some topics of your firmware.

Take it however you want, I don’t care. If you are making 3.50 an hour with mining, you make more than I do.

I have already answered some of your questions previous times you have asked. I am not going to tell you how my stuff works. Use it or don’t. Since you have never shared a supportID you have not had the pleasure of me sharing what is logged. Those who I have had to support have seen the raw logs where appropriate so your accusations of impropriety are unfounded, and as usual with your statements, just wrong.

Please keep harassing me, I enjoy it.

Jason


So harassing you is asking you legitimate questions about your firmware? Take my questions as you wish, I have not accused you of any wrong doing and have only asked you questions that deserve an answer. As I said gpu software coders have been caught ripping off the miners thru their software and with the few people asking about the dev fee running at odd times or whatever it is a concern for miners using your firmware as to what control you may have over their machine. A simple answer would have been to say "none other then dev-mode" but again since you can even answer that one questions says a lot about your character. You can show whatever log you want your in control of them.

Don't worry I wont use your firmware after your fees and server fees I lose daily profit because the speed increase all gets taken in fees. Hopefully others better luck using your firmware.

efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 05:26:04 AM
 #514

...snip...

So harassing you is asking you legitimate questions about your firmware? Take my questions as you wish, I have not accused you of any wrong doing and have only asked you questions that deserve an answer. As I said gpu software coders have been caught ripping off the miners thru their software and with the few people asking about the dev fee running at odd times or whatever it is a concern for miners using your firmware as to what control you may have over their machine. A simple answer would have been to say "none other then dev-mode" but again since you can even answer that one questions says a lot about your character. You can show whatever log you want your in control of them.

Don't worry I wont use your firmware after your fees and server fees I lose daily profit because the speed increase all gets taken in fees. Hopefully others better luck using your firmware.



I am sorry you have had bad experiences with others. As far as my character goes, that’s easy; sinful imperfect man, saved by Grace but Blessed to be alive.

I don’t have control over these miners. If the server cannot be reached, in most cases yes, it will fail to start and that is a purposeful design decision. I know if I make a mistake in availability I will lose confidence of my customers and they would uninstall.

I sure hope I got the design right and distributed it properly around the globe, and I hope my failover/ha components work right (they do, so far).

Jason

efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 06:08:19 AM
 #515

i2c is on the sys/bus but not on the /dev. The VRM is the cause of the low performance for sure

agreed. not exposed to the OS directly.

they are using "tricks" instead.

Jason

efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 06:16:30 AM
 #516

Now that I'm back to a real keyboard instead of responding to chipless noise from my phone, here is what is collected:

=====> In use: 2 of 2 licenses <=====
<=== REQ: 26XXXXXXXXXXX1ea4d (1544162907) 7 REGULAR b8XXXXXX3725a
===> RES: 26XXXXXXXXXXXXea4d (1544162908) 8 REGULAR

That's a sample from a previous paid user, who's miner sent in a status check, it's 7th communication (1 count each way) and tells the server it is in regular mode. The server uses that information, along with the users's license information, to respond ("===> RES:" line) and say "Ok, stay regular."

The only difference for dev-fee is the transition is from "REGULAR" to dev-fee and then from dev-fee to "REGULAR". The other information that is passed includes the time to mine for dev at, which is _hard coded_ at 600 seconds (10 minutes).

Otherwise, an optional message is sent back to the miner which can be displayed in the "Summary" page of the web interface (This is how the winner of the contests will be alerted).

On the very first connection, frequencies of boards are also sent back for statistical purposes and ultimately to "tune" the auto tuning function, a very crude summary of that data for the minis is included below:

Code:
Z9 Mini Average Frequencies:
Global: 660, Min 500, Max 850
Board 1: 668, Min 550, Max 787
Board 2: 668, Min 500, Max 793
Board 3: 672, Min 462, Max 787

As far as my design philosophy goes, it was "enable features, protect the work". As such, I made a hard but conscious decision to require authorization to function. Can't reach the server? Won't work for you, sorry. I had some Russian customers with that issue, so I spun up a server that worked for Russia -- problem fixed. The exception to this philosophy is paid users -- still requires authorization to start up, can run longer without a recheck. My design also allows for other options at scale (deployments of 1000+ systems for a single farm) which are not currently in use.

Can I expire firmware? Yes.
Can I revoke licenses? Yes.
Can I disable a system? Yes.
All of that is simply an artifact of requiring authorization. Nothing nefarious.

Why did I go through this trouble? A couple of users and organizations decided to take advantage of my trust. One sold my firmware on ebay as their own, another purchased a paid license for 1 system and then ran it on 1000+. How do I know this? Someone tried to claim the referral fee for the 1000+ nodes but there were not any purchases anywhere even near that number. I've since had two large organizations approach me for custom firmware work, only to run off with it since I didn't lock it down.

Did I make efforts to prevent tampering? Yes.
Did I make efforts to prevent someone else from taking over the whole authorization system and "stealing" everyone's miners? Yes (That's part of why functionality is greatly limited in terms of control, Chip -- I didn't want someone else to be able to do something nefarious because of a mistake I might have made).

What did I use to do this? I've been blessed with an excellent career and opportunities over the years to work with anything from circuit level design to architectures and deployments at global scale. I'm a number guys. I work with systems, math, statistics and more.

As far as what I'm making, spin it however you want, but I wish your math was correct. I'm giving away through these contests a fairly large portion of what I'm bringing in, to be honest. Also, the dev pools aren't hidden, so you can flat out see what I'm "bringing in" by simply looking.

So, yeah... nothing to hide there, Chip. Ball is in your court to throw the next accusation; join the discord, say hello! You could see exactly how much I do share (it's a lot more than you assume) instead of flinging poo.

Jason



chipless
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 1


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 07:43:20 AM
 #517

Now that I'm back to a real keyboard instead of responding to chipless noise from my phone, here is what is collected:

=====> In use: 2 of 2 licenses <=====
<=== REQ: 26XXXXXXXXXXX1ea4d (1544162907) 7 REGULAR b8XXXXXX3725a
===> RES: 26XXXXXXXXXXXXea4d (1544162908) 8 REGULAR

That's a sample from a previous paid user, who's miner sent in a status check, it's 7th communication (1 count each way) and tells the server it is in regular mode. The server uses that information, along with the users's license information, to respond ("===> RES:" line) and say "Ok, stay regular."

The only difference for dev-fee is the transition is from "REGULAR" to dev-fee and then from dev-fee to "REGULAR". The other information that is passed includes the time to mine for dev at, which is _hard coded_ at 600 seconds (10 minutes).

Otherwise, an optional message is sent back to the miner which can be displayed in the "Summary" page of the web interface (This is how the winner of the contests will be alerted).

On the very first connection, frequencies of boards are also sent back for statistical purposes and ultimately to "tune" the auto tuning function, a very crude summary of that data for the minis is included below:

Code:
Z9 Mini Average Frequencies:
Global: 660, Min 500, Max 850
Board 1: 668, Min 550, Max 787
Board 2: 668, Min 500, Max 793
Board 3: 672, Min 462, Max 787

As far as my design philosophy goes, it was "enable features, protect the work". As such, I made a hard but conscious decision to require authorization to function. Can't reach the server? Won't work for you, sorry. I had some Russian customers with that issue, so I spun up a server that worked for Russia -- problem fixed. The exception to this philosophy is paid users -- still requires authorization to start up, can run longer without a recheck. My design also allows for other options at scale (deployments of 1000+ systems for a single farm) which are not currently in use.

Can I expire firmware? Yes.
Can I revoke licenses? Yes.
Can I disable a system? Yes.
All of that is simply an artifact of requiring authorization. Nothing nefarious.

Why did I go through this trouble? A couple of users and organizations decided to take advantage of my trust. One sold my firmware on ebay as their own, another purchased a paid license for 1 system and then ran it on 1000+. How do I know this? Someone tried to claim the referral fee for the 1000+ nodes but there were not any purchases anywhere even near that number. I've since had two large organizations approach me for custom firmware work, only to run off with it since I didn't lock it down.

Did I make efforts to prevent tampering? Yes.
Did I make efforts to prevent someone else from taking over the whole authorization system and "stealing" everyone's miners? Yes (That's part of why functionality is greatly limited in terms of control, Chip -- I didn't want someone else to be able to do something nefarious because of a mistake I might have made).

What did I use to do this? I've been blessed with an excellent career and opportunities over the years to work with anything from circuit level design to architectures and deployments at global scale. I'm a number guys. I work with systems, math, statistics and more.

As far as what I'm making, spin it however you want, but I wish your math was correct. I'm giving away through these contests a fairly large portion of what I'm bringing in, to be honest. Also, the dev pools aren't hidden, so you can flat out see what I'm "bringing in" by simply looking.

So, yeah... nothing to hide there, Chip. Ball is in your court to throw the next accusation; join the discord, say hello! You could see exactly how much I do share (it's a lot more than you assume) instead of flinging poo.

Jason




LOL, no flinging poo on you, only out to get some answers you never told your users, such as the ability to shut them down, the ability to expire a firmware and failing to connect to your api can stop their miner. Knowing this some may not want to use your firmware and it should have been disclosed from the beginning by you about those capabilities. Was no accusation's thrown sorry only questions. An accusation would be if I would have said you were ripping your users off and I never said that.


dtawom
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 10:10:48 AM
 #518

Efudd I sent a PM with support ID and logs, maybe you can help me figure this out.
efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 07, 2018, 01:40:16 PM
 #519

Efudd I sent a PM with support ID and logs, maybe you can help me figure this out.

Ok, thank you. I’m responding from my phone at the moment, but will look into it as soon as I can. I Can quickly address one of your questions at least. In the post at the top of the thread, which I admit is noisy and needs to be cleaned up, I have said that at this point in time I am not selling new licenses but that I would update the post if that changed in the future.

I will dig through the information you provided as soon  as I can today.

*EDIT*: dtawom - I've sent you a PM with some follow-up comments and provided you my email address to reach me in case you hit PM limits on the forums.

Jason

efudd
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 26


View Profile
December 08, 2018, 04:00:33 AM
 #520

Folk,

The ZEC prize for week 1 (12/01 through 12/07 GMT time) has been selected. The winner's dashboard will be updated letting them know they have won and will be instructed to screenshot it and email it to me. If the prize is not claimed in 48 hours, I will select another random system and repeat this process until it is claimed.

There were a total of 1,767 entrants.

The breakdown is as follows:

176 systems participated 7 days = 1232
24 systems participated 6 days  = 144
31 systems participated 5 days  = 155
26 systems participated 4 days  = 104
16 systems participated 3 days  = 48
26 systems participated 2 days  = 52
32 systems participated 1 day   = 32

For each system, a single entry was added to a file, one line per day.
This file was randomly shuffled.

To get a real random number, I requested for a number between 1 and 2000 across 3 different services: 2 IRC servers and 1 Discord server.

The numbers selected by those who responded were: 679, 1337, and 716.

These were totaled and divided by 2 to determine the winner or (679+1337+716)/2 = 1366.

Please check your system dashboard after the next dev cycle to see if you are the winner.

Thank you for participating and I will likely use this same methodology for the PS4 bundle selection after 12/24.

*EDIT* The winner has collected the prize for week 1 / 1 ZEC price. The winner was a user from the Cursed Mining discord #asicmining chat running the Z9 firmware. I've asked the user if they mind I post their username -- if they agree, I'll update this post.

Jason

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!