CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[polylogic]

I use same settings on mod 3 and mod 5. Mod 5 restart every 10-15 min, and mod 3 is working perfectly.

Mod 5 is using a little bit more power than #3 so you need to increase the TDP to get the most out of it. You also need to make sure that your risers can handle the power increase.

yeah i went from 1500w to 1700w with 2 rigs, but only like 10mh more on pool :/ i wonder if i should get back to #3

[1715568190]

1715568190

[1715568190]

1715568190

[1715568190]

1715568190

[1715568190]

1715568190

[1715568190]

1715568190

[jmumich]

I use same settings on mod 3 and mod 5. Mod 5 restart every 10-15 min, and mod 3 is working perfectly.

You also need to make sure that your risers can handle the power increase.

I had to switch back to mod 3 for exactly this reason - my risers were failing at a much higher rate. Mod 3 was very stable for me, and the incremental increases afterward couldn't make up for the downtime caused by instability.

Also, just to add my two cents on GPL (I'm a lawyer, but this is not intended to be legal advice to anyone), calling something beta, and calling a fee a donation, does not alter the copyright owner's rights under GPL. Unless the copyright holder agrees otherwise, the source code and GPL must be distributed along with any binaries to those that request it, or the copyright owner's rights are violated.

That said, I "donated" (and I'm glad I did), but didn't receive (or request, for that matter) source code. But *I* have no right to the source code, because I'm not the copyright holder. The only one who could enforce GPL if they wanted to is the holder of the copyright. Likewise, the copyright holder could enter into a separate license with SP to distribute binaries without the source code if they wanted to (not saying that happened here - it looks like it didn't, but something to keep in mind for anyone who isn't a copyright holder when they complain about GPL).

One more thing to keep in mind - had I received the source code, I would have been under no obligation to publish it or share it (unless I published/shared the binary), nor would I have any incentive to do so. There's nothing wrong with SP modifying and selling GPL licensed code as long as the terms of GPL are followed, but only economic incentives would prevent redistribution of that code.

[pallas]

no: GPL gives right of requesting the sources to everyone that has the binary, not just the copyright holder.
you, as a user of the binary, are not obliged to share it, but YOU CAN.

[jmumich]

no: GPL gives right of requesting the sources to everyone that has the binary, not just the copyright holder.
you, as a user of the binary, are not obliged to share it, but YOU CAN.

This isn't technically accurate - GPL is based on copyright law, and only the owner of a copyright has any right to enforce the terms of the copyright. A user with a binary can request the source code, but the obligation to distribute it is an obligation to the copyright holder, not the user. The user has no rights to enforce a copyright they do not own, and thus would have no standing to force distribution of the source code.

You are correct that under GPL a user an distribute a binary, but the user would have to be careful and be sure they actually received it under GPL. As I mentioned before, the copyright holder could enter into a separate license allowing someone else to distribute binaries without source code for a fee.

Edit: It actually is technically accurate - anyone who received a binary licensed under GPL has the right to request it - but that's it - only to request, not to receive. The owner of the copyright is the one with the rights to make sure that anyone who requests it actually receives it.

[pallas]

no: GPL gives right of requesting the sources to everyone that has the binary, not just the copyright holder.
you, as a user of the binary, are not obliged to share it, but YOU CAN.

This isn't technically accurate - GPL is based on copyright law, and only the owner of a copyright has any right to enforce the terms of the copyright. A user with a binary can request the source code, but the obligation to distribute it is an obligation to the copyright holder, not the user. The user has no rights to enforce a copyright they do not own, and thus would have no standing to force distribution of the source code.

You are correct that under GPL a user an distribute a binary, but the user would have to be careful and be sure they actually received it under GPL. As I mentioned before, the copyright holder could enter into a separate license allowing someone else to distribute binaries without source code for a fee.

Again no, to both sentences.
You should read more about the GPL.
Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License

[abudfv2008]

2 weeks have past, and still nobody has managed to create a faster opensource signatum kernel based on your work. Stop trolling and show some skills.

I think you'd better write good code than make wars on forum.
Your skunk miner was already beated in terms of speed at least by CWI. Their miner completely beats yours in terms of CPU usage which is 0-0.3% usual, while yours uses 1-2-3-4 cores completely depending on intensity.
Your sp3/5 give ~231Mh/s on 6*1080 while CWI 250Mh/s. The same clocks.

[jmumich]

no: GPL gives right of requesting the sources to everyone that has the binary, not just the copyright holder.
you, as a user of the binary, are not obliged to share it, but YOU CAN.

This isn't technically accurate - GPL is based on copyright law, and only the owner of a copyright has any right to enforce the terms of the copyright. A user with a binary can request the source code, but the obligation to distribute it is an obligation to the copyright holder, not the user. The user has no rights to enforce a copyright they do not own, and thus would have no standing to force distribution of the source code.

You are correct that under GPL a user an distribute a binary, but the user would have to be careful and be sure they actually received it under GPL. As I mentioned before, the copyright holder could enter into a separate license allowing someone else to distribute binaries without source code for a fee.

Again no, to both sentences.
You should read more about the GPL.
Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License

I edited to make clear I'm talking about enforcement, not just the right to request. Someone with the binary can request the source code, and has the right to receive it, but only the copyright holder can enforce those rights. (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhoHasThePower)

As for the second part, nothing prevents the copyright holder from releasing code under GPL, and then releasing a separate version under a different license for resale. But that right only belongs to the copyright holder - not anyone who received GPL-licensed software. They must distribute the code, or they are violating the copyright holder's rights under GPL.

[soothaa]

sp_ why don't you just start your own self-moderated thread? I am sick of reading through looking for updates and tips/tricks and seeing people shitting on your obviously superior work and being all butthurt about it.

To those who keep crying about his work: how about you produce a faster binary than his (with an included fee) and everyone will happily switch to it and you'll make a ton of money?

[chrysophylax]

no: GPL gives right of requesting the sources to everyone that has the binary, not just the copyright holder.
you, as a user of the binary, are not obliged to share it, but YOU CAN.

This isn't technically accurate - GPL is based on copyright law, and only the owner of a copyright has any right to enforce the terms of the copyright. A user with a binary can request the source code, but the obligation to distribute it is an obligation to the copyright holder, not the user. The user has no rights to enforce a copyright they do not own, and thus would have no standing to force distribution of the source code.

You are correct that under GPL a user an distribute a binary, but the user would have to be careful and be sure they actually received it under GPL. As I mentioned before, the copyright holder could enter into a separate license allowing someone else to distribute binaries without source code for a fee.

Again no, to both sentences.
You should read more about the GPL.
Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License

I edited to make clear I'm talking about enforcement, not just the right to request. Someone with the binary can request the source code, and has the right to receive it, but only the copyright holder can enforce those rights. (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhoHasThePower)

As for the second part, nothing prevents the copyright holder from releasing code under GPL, and then releasing a separate version under a different license for resale. But that right only belongs to the copyright holder - not anyone who received GPL-licensed software. They must distribute the code, or they are violating the copyright holder's rights under GPL.

an IP lawyer? ... have you even read the GPL? ...

here - let me help you with your non-conforming advice ( or non-advice as your post seems to be ) with the link - https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html ...

pay close attention to the details - particularly to sections 4 5 and 6 ... where source is BY LAW part of the verbatim - non-verbatim - and modified distributed versions ...

sp ( rune ) is BREAKING THE LAW - by receiving PAID PURCHASES for products that he does NOT hold the copyright to - WITHOUT providing the source code to the modified source ...

while ive maintained my silence with all this hooha - i totally agree with you ( and so does the law ) that sp needs to EDUCATE himself on the meanings of certain terms and words of the english vocabulary ...

this link is to help rune understand what a donor ( what he calls 'donator' ) is and means ...

donor ( thats 'donator' to you sp ) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donor ...
donation - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation ...

and here is what you are ACTUALLY doing - and fooling everyone into thinking that they are 'donating' ...

purchase ( your meaning of 'donating' ) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing ...
buy ( also your meaning of 'donating' ) - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/buy ...

being the sly conniving scum that you are - you will just ignore all these things posted and STILL think that you are doing nothing wrong ...

but wait a minute - redistributing the cuda90 dll to 'donators' too? ... isnt that breaking the nvidia license as well? ...

yup - sure does ...

just on that point also - as i know YOU rune - and alexis intimately ... have worked with both of you closely - and have watched and geared our business ( CWI ) to protect ourselves from scumbags of the likes of you - i can say this much ...

the difference between you and alexis is a chasm the size of the grand canyon ...

#crysx

[chrysophylax]

sp_ why don't you just start your own self-moderated thread? I am sick of reading through looking for updates and tips/tricks and seeing people shitting on your obviously superior work and being all butthurt about it.

To those who keep crying about his work: how about you produce a faster binary than his (with an included fee) and everyone will happily switch to it and you'll make a ton of money?

we have ...

here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2054431 ...

and further - if you prefer a thief and cheat to create your work - then you deserve what you get with him ...

#crysx

[polylogic]

sp_ why don't you just start your own self-moderated thread? I am sick of reading through looking for updates and tips/tricks and seeing people shitting on your obviously superior work and being all butthurt about it.

To those who keep crying about his work: how about you produce a faster binary than his (with an included fee) and everyone will happily switch to it and you'll make a ton of money?

i would say well said, but you have to think about the other side.
without the open source version sp_ mod wouldnt exsist.
i love open source and im all for it.
i wish i could code but each time i try to learn my brain explodes.
in a perfect world we would all work together and release everything opensource so we can advance from each other.
but all we do is fight and compromise each others work.

now we have a binary that really is superior to most others out there and if sp_ chooses to collect a really minor donation so i can enjoy this advantage.

w108/06

[polylogic]

does he need to open source it? no, he doesnt even have to provide us with updates or as a matter of fact some binary at all.
if it was about the money he would go to some china farm or btc whale and collect 1000btc from just one company with enough hashing power to roi in a couple of weeks

now is it the best thing to do? or the right thing to do?! arguing about it wont matter.
sp_ donators are very happy with their donation and all the service they get.

it still a long way untill we all work together.

w104/07

[wikran01]

can you answer my pm i would like to know more about the tribus  mod

[polylogic]

and here is what you are ACTUALLY doing - and fooling everyone into thinking that they are 'donating' ...

i am sorry but i did donate.
i donated virtual money and got a nice virtual present in return.
bending the rules is not breaking the rules.
if he doesnt "break your law" here he can do it everywhere else.
but he is not. he is asking for donations for a private unreleased version of an open source miner.
well yeah, we all know thats not true, but dont hate the player, hate the game.
he got something everybody wants. why would he give it to you.
he is not obligated to help the community, but still he does.
maybe not in a way you would approve, but still donators are happy.

w112/08

[thinkfar]

Hi!
Who bought and use sp-mod for bitcore (btx) on 1060 6Gb? Can u write me PM your hashrate? Thx!

2017-08-08 22:23:47] [S/A/T]: 2/2090/2099, diff: 3.380, 77.35MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:23:52] bitcore block 27340, diff 461.413
[2017-08-08 22:24:10] [S/A/T]: 2/2091/2100, diff: 21.077, 77.35MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:24:13] [S/A/T]: 2/2092/2101, diff: 0.697, 77.35MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:24:20] [S/A/T]: 2/2093/2102, diff: 0.278, 77.35MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:24:22] GPU#0:Zotac GTX 1060 6GB, 12.75MH/s
[2017-08-08 22:24:33] [S/A/T]: 2/2094/2103, diff: 2.481, 77.34MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:24:41] [S/A/T]: 2/2095/2104, diff: 0.236, 77.34MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:24:49] GPU#1:Zotac GTX 1060 6GB, 12.85MH/s
[2017-08-08 22:24:54] bitcore block 27341, diff 461.413
[2017-08-08 22:25:04] [S/A/T]: 2/2096/2105, diff: 0.353, 77.33MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:25:32] [S/A/T]: 2/2097/2106, diff: 0.258, 77.33MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:25:34] Stratum difficulty set to 44.2676 (0.17292)
[2017-08-08 22:25:34] bitcore block 27342, diff 461.413
[2017-08-08 22:25:39] [S/A/T]: 2/2098/2107, diff: 0.721, 77.32MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:25:51] [S/A/T]: 2/2099/2108, diff: 0.461, 77.32MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:26:06] [S/A/T]: 2/2100/2109, diff: 0.204, 77.31MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:26:09] [S/A/T]: 2/2101/2110, diff: 0.220, 77.31MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:26:12] [S/A/T]: 2/2102/2111, diff: 0.392, 77.31MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:26:27] [S/A/T]: 2/2103/2112, diff: 0.201, 77.31MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:26:31] GPU#2:Zotac GTX 1060 6GB, 12.87MH/s
[2017-08-08 22:26:43] bitcore block 27343, diff 461.413
[2017-08-08 22:26:51] [S/A/T]: 2/2104/2113, diff: 0.463, 77.30MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:27:14] [S/A/T]: 2/2105/2114, diff: 0.846, 77.30MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:27:15] [S/A/T]: 2/2106/2115, diff: 0.846, 77.30MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:27:18] [S/A/T]: 2/2107/2116, diff: 9.713, 77.30MH/s yes!
[2017-08-08 22:27:31] [S/A/T]: 2/2108/2117, diff: 0.332, 77.30MH/s yes!

Please reply the inbox. Thank you.

[chrysophylax]

and here is what you are ACTUALLY doing - and fooling everyone into thinking that they are 'donating' ...

i am sorry but i did donate.
i donated virtual money and got a nice virtual present in return.
bending the rules is not breaking the rules.
if he doesnt "break your law" here he can do it everywhere else.
but he is not. he is asking for donations for a private unreleased version of an open source miner.
well yeah, we all know thats not true, but dont hate the player, hate the game.
he got something everybody wants. why would he give it to you.
he is not obligated to help the community, but still he does.
maybe not in a way you would approve, but still donators are happy.

w112/07

wrong ...

you are PURCHASING a miner ...

do you not read? ...

donation is voluntary and in no way constitutes anything in return ...

you 'donate' ( ie - PAY ) for a miner ... that is a very different thing altogether ... a miner that he has created OFF the backs of other devs AND breaking the GPL licenses ...

whe someone says 'unless you 'donate' you dont get the miner' - that is NOT donation - that is BUYING ... and as such - he is liable and under - the laws of the governing state and country ... especially IP law ...

so regardless of how happy you are -or not - he IS breaking the law ... and it will catch up to him ...

i know - i use to be a huge backer of sp - until his true color were shown ... he not only breaks the law - but will eventually turn his back on you - and every one else ... especially when he calls all his customers ( yes - CUSTOMERS ) not donors ) all sorts of names and obscenities ...

i can swear like any one here - but to call what rune stensland is doing - LEGAL? ... you REALLY need to watch where this takes you - and take a VERY close look at it ... because if you condone this - and see it as not breaking international licenses and law - then how are you likely to be a moral decent citizen in everyday life? ...

i dont wish anything bad on you - but WHEN he kicks you and all his so called 'donors' - then ill be just looking on from the sidelines - as i take notes as to WHO has morals and decency here -
 and who doesnt ...

but this is why you wouldnt understand the differences ... turning a blind eye to it - does NOT mean he is not doing anything wrong ...

#crysx

[sp_]

I get donations and continue to update the miner for free.

I could sell my work to bigger farms and earn alot of bitcoins. I have plenty of offers.

[candyiman]

I think we wasting our time here.


If you dont like SP there are 3 ways to "Destroy" Him,

1. Create something equaliy good or better With Lower fees than him  or for free

 2 Find hackes to break into his code

 3 Earn His Trust buy(or group buy) his miners and spread them for free


till then we are wasting our time here,  Btw Yes ok I understand the Claymore thing

Genoil improved hashes for 1060,  Claymore a day later  used it and Now all Eth hashers are hashing more (Hence getting exactly the same ) and he gets 2%  I really do understand what is happening but the question is what can you do about it?  Well simple "Break the rules" and be honest about it.


Someone made a thread Claymore no fee miner  thats how you do it,   Btw If i was Genoil and made an improvement on 1060 i would Close source it and then Post it for free so that Claymore or others wont take his work and gain from it

[sp_]

There is alot of coordinated Head activity in my thread today. Green team? Red Team? Blue Team? Black Team? Alpha team?

Stop bitching and start coding..

[scryptr]

I WOKE UP TODAY HUNGOVER--

And, when tending my miners, started reading my favorite blogs.  FOUR UNREAD PAGES on my top favorite mining blog, spMOD.  GADZOOKS!  Well, I also read CryptoMining-Blog's latest post, downloaded Epsylon3's latest Signatum (SIGT) build, and my 1080ti is mining SIGT at 52MH/s with stock clocks and "-i 25".  No errors, no rejects yet, on Win 7 x64.  Faster than spMOD v5 (and the others) and PalginMod SIGT CCminers.

So, while everyone was arguing, Epsylon3 dished out some more smooth, checked and tested FOSS (Free Open Source Software).  And, yes, I got a pirated copy of sp_'s version that was clean, ran it on YIIMP long enough to earn 1 SIGT, and then went back to mining Equihash.  Epsylon3's "krnlx" build is faster.

I'll save spMOD v5 along with my collection of old BBS system software and pirated Pascal v7.  Somewhere on a floppy.  Anyone want to buy a super 1337 9600 baud modem?       --scryptr