KanoPool since 2014 🐈 - PPLNS and Solo 0.5% fee - Worldwide - 2436 blocks

[Xircom]

Congrats Citronic with your block.... wonder if it was an S9, but it looks like you are more an hash renter, so you cant tell ?

All S9s, I am off rentals to do another project...  

That S9 was installed less than 24 hours ago!

Brilliant Citronick, then there is hope for all us that did purchase a bunch of S9´s before we knew they screwed Kano and Ck.kolivas and the Cgminer license....

[1715150773]

1715150773

[1715150773]

1715150773

[1715150773]

1715150773

[Sierra8561]

I find it amazing that an S9 commissioned barely 24 hours ago has hit a block !!! 

I had the same thing happen with my first batch of s9's one hit a block in 4 hours. My one and only block

[citronick]

Congrats Citronic with your block.... wonder if it was an S9, but it looks like you are more an hash renter, so you cant tell ?

All S9s, I am off rentals to do another project...  

That S9 was installed less than 24 hours ago!

Brilliant Citronick, then there is hope for all us that did purchase a bunch of S9´s before we knew they screwed Kano and Ck.kolivas and the Cgminer license....

Yup....

Bitmain "stealing" cgminer codes and labelling it their own is totally unprofessional - IMHO.... but the fact remains - S9 delivers more hashing power at lower power consumption. I hope new mining hardware from other vendors can catch up as soon as possible and the break Bitmain's miner hw monopoly.

[Chili.Dog]

I know there is no 100% answer. but since avalon was sold, I would think the new owners would develop a new and improved avalon 7,8,9, what ever.
 To compete with the S9s.  Do you think you could link them with the A6s?
I'm so confused, do I buy some S9s or wait for avalon to do there thing.

[d57heinz]

Don't think we have ever had back to back 400% blocks. Ouch.

Glad we didn't that time either

Block by Citronick

@Kano

Since you are on the subject of the s9.  Here is a log of what my batch 8 are doing.  im getting a ton of rejects on nicehash and then thought maybe was low diff coin or somehting.. so i moved it here and its no better.  Could be that the first batchs test ok with your pool and now maybe they change something idk.. Here is the log from cgminer(bmminer).

(5s):11.83T (1m):2.959T (5m):656.7G (15m):222.8G (avg):11.85Th/s
 A:639804  R:303566  HW:3  WU:117045.2/m
 Connected to stratum.kano.is diff 8.01K with stratum as user d57heinz.s901
 Block: cee61344...  Diff:48K  Started: [17:57:56]  Best share: 2.87M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [P]ool management Settings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: BC5 0       :                         | 11.01T / 11.80Th/ WU:0.0/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:32] Found block for pool 0!
 [2016-07-28 18:03:32] Accepted a04c082e Diff 105K/8009 BLOCK! BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:36] Accepted 0319512a Diff 21.1K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:39] Accepted 02183469 Diff 31.3K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:39] Accepted 03b0aa83 Diff 17.8K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Found block for pool 0!
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Accepted 01007738 Diff 65.4K/8009 BLOCK! BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Found block for pool 0!
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Rejected a04c082e Diff 105K/8009 BLOCK! BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:48] Rejected 0319512a Diff 21.1K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:51] Rejected 02183469 Diff 31.3K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:51] Rejected 03b0aa83 Diff 17.8K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)


Best Regards
d57heinz

Edit what stands out to me is why the network diff is only 48k?  Should be 213 g  correct?

Edit .. it seems to clear up after a random amount of time mining.  I also changed my diff on the workers tab to 10000 so that it wouldnt get bombarded with shares on connect.  I thought --suggest-diff in the password would do it.. cgminer showing correct network diff now.

[firetreeactual]

I know there is no 100% answer. but since avalon was sold, I would think the new owners would develop a new and improved avalon 7,8,9, what ever.
 To compete with the S9s.  Do you think you could link them with the A6s?
I'm so confused, do I buy some S9s or wait for avalon to do there thing.

Well, at the moment you can't get a new S9 anyway...they're sold out (or at least they were when I checked earlier this morning). If I were LYT (the new owners of Avalon), I'd be busting my posterior to put out a competitor to best the S9. I'm waiting a bit to see what develops. Either the price will have to come down on S9s, or Avalon comes out with a 5TH/1400W machine that's around USD$1.5-2K...and the BTC world rejoices...and LYT makes a mint. 

Afterthought...I don't think LYT would have bought out Avalon if there wasn't something in the works.

[kano]

Don't think we have ever had back to back 400% blocks. Ouch.

Glad we didn't that time either

Block by Citronick

@Kano

Since you are on the subject of the s9.  Here is a log of what my batch 8 are doing.  im getting a ton of rejects on nicehash and then thought maybe was low diff coin or somehting.. so i moved it here and its no better.  Could be that the first batchs test ok with your pool and now maybe they change something idk.. Here is the log from cgminer(bmminer).

(5s):11.83T (1m):2.959T (5m):656.7G (15m):222.8G (avg):11.85Th/s
 A:639804  R:303566  HW:3  WU:117045.2/m
 Connected to stratum.kano.is diff 8.01K with stratum as user d57heinz.s901
 Block: cee61344...  Diff:48K  Started: [17:57:56]  Best share: 2.87M
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 [P]ool management Settings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
 0: BC5 0       :                         | 11.01T / 11.80Th/ WU:0.0/m
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:32] Found block for pool 0!
 [2016-07-28 18:03:32] Accepted a04c082e Diff 105K/8009 BLOCK! BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:36] Accepted 0319512a Diff 21.1K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:39] Accepted 02183469 Diff 31.3K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:39] Accepted 03b0aa83 Diff 17.8K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Found block for pool 0!
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Accepted 01007738 Diff 65.4K/8009 BLOCK! BC5 0 pool 0
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Found block for pool 0!
 [2016-07-28 18:03:44] Rejected a04c082e Diff 105K/8009 BLOCK! BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:48] Rejected 0319512a Diff 21.1K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:51] Rejected 02183469 Diff 31.3K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)
 [2016-07-28 18:03:51] Rejected 03b0aa83 Diff 17.8K/8009 BC5 0 pool 0 (Duplicate)


Best Regards
d57heinz

Edit what stands out to me is why the network diff is only 48k?  Should be 213 g  correct?

Edit .. it seems to clear up after a random amount of time mining.  I also changed my diff on the workers tab to 10000 so that it wouldnt get bombarded with shares on connect.  I thought --suggest-diff in the password would do it.. cgminer showing correct network diff now.

Well ... .... mining through nicehash reduces your reward by their 3% fee (yep more than 3 times the pool fee) and increases stales and slows down any block you might find getting to the pool, and their closed source software inspects every share/block that goes through their poxy and does who knows what with them.

As for your output:
Those block messages above are bitmain's usual screwing around with the main cgminer code and breaking it.

You are looking there at the results of bitmain's (so far) closed source hack of cgminer that they call bmminer
I've no idea exactly what they have changed in it and screwed up, since, like for everyone else, there's no sign of any s9 source code.

[wmabern]

@Kano, do you not have legal recourse against them for modifying your code without permission?

[DarkStar_]

@Kano, do you not have legal recourse against them for modifying your code without permission?

I believe he does, since CGMiner is licensed under GPLv3. Not for modifying it without permission though, but for making modifications without releasing the new source. See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=28402.0 (The CGMiner thread) Not sure if he plans on legal action against them, but if he was, I would think he would have announced it already. He's had contact with Bitmain too (see the statement about asking if he wanted to buy a S9)

NOTE: This code is licensed under the GPLv3. This means that the source to any
modifications you make to this code MUST be provided by law if you distribute
modified binaries. See COPYING for details.

[kano]

@Kano, do you not have legal recourse against them for modifying your code without permission?

As stated above, they can change the code however they like, they are simply required to make it available.

There's no point in taking legal action.
Money and lawyers are the last thing that comes to my mind when dealing with opensource code.

Anyway, Bitmain is in China where they can ignore licenses.
All I can do (and care to do) is simply inform people of the situation and leave it up to people to act on that (which most ignore)

[wolfen]

I think the next batch of s9 is due in about a week.

[wmabern]

My concern is that they have put something in the code that causes the S9's to perform well on Antpoo and to perform poorly on other pools. I wouldn't put something like that past them.
That's why we need to have the source code available for "peer review".

I don't trust them to live up to ethical standards. But there's not a lot the typical "home miner' can do other than to boycott purchasing the S9. And that's basically shooting ourselves in the foot to make a point. It's not gonna happen.
Just my thoughts.

[d57heinz]

Thanks for the info kano. it is a shame they dont seem to respect the very thing that got them where they are today.> open source..  Im sure they have learned a lot over the years and profited well.. so i im certain they can see the value in this.. Can we copy cgminer 4.9.2 to s9 like we did with s4 ??  i realize maybe it wont stay upon reboot but i dont reboot often and dont have many to deal with like i used to.. Anyone have any experience with s9 and this?  Would it need a special driver to operate the hash boards?  Can discuss this on another topic if anyone has any info on this..  Or maybe a thread has already been started?

Best Regards
d57heinz

[citronick]

Don't think we have ever had back to back 400% blocks. Ouch.

Glad we didn't that time either

Block by Citronick

@Kano

Since you are on the subject of the s9.  Here is a log of what my batch 8 are doing.  im getting a ton of rejects on nicehash and then thought maybe was low diff coin or somehting.. so i moved it here and its no better.  Could be that the first batchs test ok with your pool and now maybe they change something idk.. Here is the log from cgminer(bmminer).

<snip>

Best Regards
d57heinz

Edit what stands out to me is why the network diff is only 48k?  Should be 213 g  correct?

Edit .. it seems to clear up after a random amount of time mining.  I also changed my diff on the workers tab to 10000 so that it wouldnt get bombarded with shares on connect.  I thought --suggest-diff in the password would do it.. cgminer showing correct network diff now.

@d57heinz - in my S7s, I didn't put any --suggest-diff, because I recall -ck advising that the stratum will take care of the shares and diff..... however since S9 is using bminer, as per your test above, are your S9s holding up to the correct network diff ?
All my S9s are Batch 1 and 3.

[citronick]

Thanks for the info kano. it is a shame they dont seem to respect the very thing that got them where they are today.> open source..  Im sure they have learned a lot over the years and profited well.. so i im certain they can see the value in this.. Can we copy cgminer 4.9.2 to s9 like we did with s4 ??  i realize maybe it wont stay upon reboot but i dont reboot often and dont have many to deal with like i used to.. Anyone have any experience with s9 and this?  Would it need a special driver to operate the hash boards?  Can discuss this on another topic if anyone has any info on this..  Or maybe a thread has already been started?

Best Regards
d57heinz

I am all for cgminer 4.9.2 on the S9 -- I am not technical enough to initiate this - I hope the experts can take the lead.

[clgrissom3]

Block by Abramov with his 4th for Kano!  

It's time Hulk UP and turn things green!  

[wmabern]

Speaking of S9 behavior....

One of my S9's keeps failing over to the solo pool for about 10 minutes and then back to the main pool. It continues to do this and has happened at least 3 times. I just noticed this. It's now back at the main pool.

None of my other S9's have failed over at all.

Must be time for a reboot.  

[wmabern]

Thanks for the info kano. it is a shame they dont seem to respect the very thing that got them where they are today.> open source..  Im sure they have learned a lot over the years and profited well.. so i im certain they can see the value in this.. Can we copy cgminer 4.9.2 to s9 like we did with s4 ??  i realize maybe it wont stay upon reboot but i dont reboot often and dont have many to deal with like i used to.. Anyone have any experience with s9 and this?  Would it need a special driver to operate the hash boards?  Can discuss this on another topic if anyone has any info on this..  Or maybe a thread has already been started?

Best Regards
d57heinz

I am all for cgminer 4.9.2 on the S9 -- I am not technical enough to initiate this - I hope the experts can take the lead.

Ditto on this!

[edonkey]

Block by Abramov with his 4th for Kano!  

It's time Hulk up and turn things green!

Praise Block!

This happened just after I made myself an Old Fashioned with Larceny bourbon.

Forget eating chicken to promote blocks. I'm switching to bourbon offerings

I'm willing to sacrifice my liver for the greater good of the pool!

[kano]

Block by Abramov with his 4th for Kano!  

... and a share that would be a block for a long time to come
12,099.7% Diff (25.8T)

Checking recent history, the share for block #1173, 420871, 2 weeks ago by ginex is probably the record though.
That was 92,963.5% Diff (198T)