CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[sp_]

I've been an opensource supporter for more than 20 years. I don't break the GPL, I use and support it.

[sp_]

But if I sell private kernals for 0.01Btc in donation and a 2% fee then I might be not breaking anything. What do you think bensam?

A 10% faster quark/x11 miner. Who wants it?

[djm34]

This has been discussed before.

Without rewrites you get gpl violations.

No one cares about GPL violations in the crypto world. As long as you never form a legitimate business that makes million you'll never be worth suing. No one is going to send the coppers after you. It happens allll the time in the crypto world as well. Generally speaking it happens a LOT in the real world and usually nothing is ever done because the people who make GPL code don't have the resources to sue someone.

If this is your shiny suit of armor you're wearing things aren't going to go anywhere. If the 'business' ever gets big enough, you'll be able to get someone to rewrite everything that you haven't yet and pay them BTC.

I'm not saying it's a great idea to break 'laws', but in this case it really doesn't matter and no one gives two flips about it. That argument was just a easy way out to avoid actually doing something meaningful here.

for info GPL licence doesn't mean 'free', you can request payment for a software even if it is published within GPL licence
(see the definition of the licence).  The GPL licence only means that the source has to be available (as far as I have understood)

[pallas]

This has been discussed before.

Without rewrites you get gpl violations.

No one cares about GPL violations in the crypto world. As long as you never form a legitimate business that makes million you'll never be worth suing. No one is going to send the coppers after you. It happens allll the time in the crypto world as well. Generally speaking it happens a LOT in the real world and usually nothing is ever done because the people who make GPL code don't have the resources to sue someone.

If this is your shiny suit of armor you're wearing things aren't going to go anywhere. If the 'business' ever gets big enough, you'll be able to get someone to rewrite everything that you haven't yet and pay them BTC.

I'm not saying it's a great idea to break 'laws', but in this case it really doesn't matter and no one gives two flips about it. That argument was just a easy way out to avoid actually doing something meaningful here.

for info GPL licence doesn't mean 'free', you can request payment for a software even if it is published within GPL licence
(see the definition of the licence).  The GPL licence only means that the source has to be available (as far as I have understood)

hmmmm well... "available for free": if you sell a private miner to a single person, he can request the sources and he has the rights to re-distribute them for free.
business around opensource works in a different way than that.

[skunk]

LINUX OPEN SOURCE ALGO SWITCHER--

If somebody good enough at coding could create a Linux algo-switcher that works as well as NiceHash Miner, they would have a personal product of value.

NiceHash Miner uses tthe .Net environment that is Windows oriented.  There Are .Net implementations in Linux now, but they require some skill to configure.  If anyone could even come up with a .Net installation tutorial for Linux that is mining orienteed, they'd have something.  The .Net 2.0 environment is required to run NiceHash Miner, I tred and failed to configure Wine to do the job.       --scryptr

i'm using an on the fly coded bash script for that, it works but it's very messy and it will unlikely fit for someone without bash coding skills...
if i manage to clean it up a little i'll let you know...

Thank You Skunk--

I have tried with the version of your script that you posted earlier.  I did get it to mine, but not  in a stable, reliable fashion.  Several of the pools that it was customized for shut down.  I discovered while toying with your script that "BASH" and "SH" were not equivalent commands, by the way.

I'll try to work with your original scrypt again.  I tried before to trim out the inactive pools and damaged the script.  A simplified version for NiceHash only would be a really attractive piece of code.     --scryptr

in the mean time i've added a lot of features to the script and some of them even revealed useless, therefore it became bloated and bug prone...
i'll rewrite it from scratch beginning with nicehash switching and slowly re-adding profit switching pools (there's just hashpower atm), local wallets switching and so on...
but please, don't hold your breath, i'm very busy and just mining with my desktop's gpu, therefore it will be a free spare time task.

[pallas]

LINUX OPEN SOURCE ALGO SWITCHER--

If somebody good enough at coding could create a Linux algo-switcher that works as well as NiceHash Miner, they would have a personal product of value.

NiceHash Miner uses tthe .Net environment that is Windows oriented.  There Are .Net implementations in Linux now, but they require some skill to configure.  If anyone could even come up with a .Net installation tutorial for Linux that is mining orienteed, they'd have something.  The .Net 2.0 environment is required to run NiceHash Miner, I tred and failed to configure Wine to do the job.       --scryptr

i'm using an on the fly coded bash script for that, it works but it's very messy and it will unlikely fit for someone without bash coding skills...
if i manage to clean it up a little i'll let you know...

Thank You Skunk--

I have tried with the version of your script that you posted earlier.  I did get it to mine, but not  in a stable, reliable fashion.  Several of the pools that it was customized for shut down.  I discovered while toying with your script that "BASH" and "SH" were not equivalent commands, by the way.

I'll try to work with your original scrypt again.  I tried before to trim out the inactive pools and damaged the script.  A simplified version for NiceHash only would be a really attractive piece of code.     --scryptr

in the mean time i've added a lot of features to the script and some of them even revealed useless, therefore it became bloated and bug prone...
i'll rewrite it from scratch beginning with nicehash switching and slowly re-adding profit switching pools (there's just hashpower atm), local wallets switching and so on...
but please, don't hold your breath, i'm very busy and just mining with my desktop's gpu, therefore it will be a free spare time task.

please put you effort on git or svn so we can pull request it ;-)

[bensam1231]

This has been discussed before.

Without rewrites you get gpl violations.

No one cares about GPL violations in the crypto world. As long as you never form a legitimate business that makes million you'll never be worth suing. No one is going to send the coppers after you. It happens allll the time in the crypto world as well. Generally speaking it happens a LOT in the real world and usually nothing is ever done because the people who make GPL code don't have the resources to sue someone.

If this is your shiny suit of armor you're wearing things aren't going to go anywhere. If the 'business' ever gets big enough, you'll be able to get someone to rewrite everything that you haven't yet and pay them BTC.

I'm not saying it's a great idea to break 'laws', but in this case it really doesn't matter and no one gives two flips about it. That argument was just a easy way out to avoid actually doing something meaningful here.

I've been an opensource supporter for more than 20 years. I don't break the GPL, I use and support it.

Once again getting down into the dirty bits here. There was a lawyer that was in the thread earlier that said everything was a mess anyway (some parts you can sell and that's good and other parts you were't supposed to be able to, but people do it anyway). You can pretend you're doing everything appropriately, then sell copies through PMs and still pretend that you haven't violated anything. Not that that's what you do, but that's what the majority of the people do around here. It's still selling it and you still have to give source with it, depending on the license.

It doesn't matter. Assuming it's all for the greater good anyway, everyone would benefit from a well supported miner that uses a % to fund itself. A % fund is no different then selling copies through PMs as far as GPL licensing is concerned as well. A miner fee doesn't violate GPL licensing anymore then selling it in the first place does and people are already doing that. It's not specifically unique to a 'miner fee'.

I think this really all comes down to 'who gets paid'. People that still work on the code definitely should be the ones making the majority of the money, especially if stuff becomes depreciated. I mean open source miners are great and everything, but we all (devs and miners) know that's not cutting it and there is no uniform method for devs to earn money. A miner fee continually supports the developers for their work. Miners need to have work continually updated to in order to stay competitive with farms with private kernel devs.

Sorta sounds like you guys need someone to come along and act as arbitrary for determining who makes what. Ideally though, all the developers that still want to work for something more 'public' and make something back should be working on it and share code with each other so they can continually build a better miner. I don't know enough about coding to be able to tell what's going on, Nicehash might be a good candidate for that, depending on their end goals, which right now just seem to be making sure everyone can earn money and continue to hash on their service.

I'm not even sure why you'd want a .01BTC donation in the first place SP... A fee will earn you support as long as the miner is relevant. While maybe there are some people that would tear it apart and tear out the code, there are a lot of people that would use a 2% fee miner, myself included as long as it's continually supported and competitive. If someone releases their own 2% miner and it's faster, of course I'll switch... that's just the way it goes, it's competition.

[joblo]

A new opportunity may have come. Is anyone working on an argon2 miner? It just showed up on hashpower
at the top of their profitability.

If I could code cuda I'd be all over it.

[pallas]

A new opportunity may have come. Is anyone working on an argon2 miner? It just showed up on hashpower
at the top of their profitability.

If I could code cuda I'd be all over it.

I'm over it since yesterday.
Currently I'm getting about 1 milliBTC per cpu/day.
The usual cpu mining non-profit ;-)

About the algo: most of the time is spent doing standard scrypt-jane, I don't think there is a lot to optimise.

[bathrobehero]

A new opportunity may have come. Is anyone working on an argon2 miner? It just showed up on hashpower
at the top of their profitability.

If I could code cuda I'd be all over it.

It's a pretty insignificant coin mining profitability-wise; the total daily coins that can be mined worth a total of ~0.04 BTC.
Edit: I have no info on 2016Coin. 2016Coin's daily total emission is also worth ~0.04 BTC.
Edit#2: There's also OPES which also have a daily emission curently worth of ~0.035 BTC.
So all 3 of these Argon2 miners share a total of 0.115 BTC a day. It's up to the developers if they see that enough to try implementing it but I have a suspicion they won't, because scrypt-jane is not a particularily liked algo between devs.

[rednoW]

It seems now we urgently need faster x15 miner.
Ready to donate 0.01 btc for my poor gtx750)))

[joblo]

A new opportunity may have come. Is anyone working on an argon2 miner? It just showed up on hashpower
at the top of their profitability.

If I could code cuda I'd be all over it.

It's a pretty insignificant coin mining profitability-wise; the total daily coins that can be mined worth a total of ~0.04 BTC.
Edit: I have no info on 2016Coin. 2016Coin's daily total emission is also worth ~0.04 BTC.
Edit#2: There's also OPES which also have a daily emission curently worth of ~0.035 BTC.
So all 3 of these Argon2 miners share a total of 0.115 BTC a day. It's up to the developers if they see that enough to try implementing it but I have a suspicion they won't, because scrypt-jane is not a particularily liked algo between devs.

That's an interesting approach to slow the arms race, choose an algo developpers don't like to work on.

[bathrobehero]

It seems now we urgently need faster x15 miner.
Ready to donate 0.01 btc for my poor gtx750)))

Is there a new x15 coin I missed?

[joblo]

It seems now we urgently need faster x15 miner.
Ready to donate 0.01 btc for my poor gtx750)))

Let's do some math. I don't know the performance of a 750 i'll use a 750ti in my example.
A 750ti produces about 2100 kh. X15 is currently paying around 0.3 BTC/GH/day.

A 750ti will produce: (0.3 * 2100) / 1000000 = 0.00063 BTC/day

If you get a 10% increase for .01 BTC your ROI will be:

0.01 / (0.1 * 0.00063 ) = 158.7 days

This is for a 750ti, a 750 will be a little longer, and without factoring power cost. That's a long time to
invest in an algo that could fade back into the shadows at any time.

Now if you had 100 or 1000 cards, as SP suggested, the ROI would drop to a 1.57 days, and, 3.8 hours
respectively. 0.01 BTC is pretty cheap when you can ROI that fast.

Putting a minimum donation amount to get a private optimized miner is unfair to small miners
while allowing farms to get it dirt cheap.

Coincidentally I'm working on a faster CPU miner for X algos that nearly doubles the X15 performance
but noone wants to pay for a CPU miner. I'm not doing it to make money, I'm doing it because it's fun
and I'm learning something along the way. And if I ever get it finished I'll probably give it away.

[rednoW]

2 joblo

I'm taking btc from eth mining with amd (red camp) and ready to give to improve green camp :lol:

[djm34]

This has been discussed before.

Without rewrites you get gpl violations.

No one cares about GPL violations in the crypto world. As long as you never form a legitimate business that makes million you'll never be worth suing. No one is going to send the coppers after you. It happens allll the time in the crypto world as well. Generally speaking it happens a LOT in the real world and usually nothing is ever done because the people who make GPL code don't have the resources to sue someone.

If this is your shiny suit of armor you're wearing things aren't going to go anywhere. If the 'business' ever gets big enough, you'll be able to get someone to rewrite everything that you haven't yet and pay them BTC.

I'm not saying it's a great idea to break 'laws', but in this case it really doesn't matter and no one gives two flips about it. That argument was just a easy way out to avoid actually doing something meaningful here.

I've been an opensource supporter for more than 20 years. I don't break the GPL, I use and support it.

Once again getting down into the dirty bits here. There was a lawyer that was in the thread earlier that said everything was a mess anyway (some parts you can sell and that's good and other parts you were't supposed to be able to, but people do it anyway). You can pretend you're doing everything appropriately, then sell copies through PMs and still pretend that you haven't violated anything. Not that that's what you do, but that's what the majority of the people do around here. It's still selling it and you still have to give source with it, depending on the license.

It doesn't matter. Assuming it's all for the greater good anyway, everyone would benefit from a well supported miner that uses a % to fund itself. A % fund is no different then selling copies through PMs as far as GPL licensing is concerned as well. A miner fee doesn't violate GPL licensing anymore then selling it in the first place does and people are already doing that. It's not specifically unique to a 'miner fee'.

I think this really all comes down to 'who gets paid'. People that still work on the code definitely should be the ones making the majority of the money, especially if stuff becomes depreciated. I mean open source miners are great and everything, but we all (devs and miners) know that's not cutting it and there is no uniform method for devs to earn money. A miner fee continually supports the developers for their work. Miners need to have work continually updated to in order to stay competitive with farms with private kernel devs.

Sorta sounds like you guys need someone to come along and act as arbitrary for determining who makes what. Ideally though, all the developers that still want to work for something more 'public' and make something back should be working on it and share code with each other so they can continually build a better miner. I don't know enough about coding to be able to tell what's going on, Nicehash might be a good candidate for that, depending on their end goals, which right now just seem to be making sure everyone can earn money and continue to hash on their service.

I'm not even sure why you'd want a .01BTC donation in the first place SP...

because he wants all the donations 

[rednoW]

Is there a new x15 coin I missed?

I don't know. But looking to nicehash figures it should be ))
For a small hobby miner it is too boring and time consuming to hunt for new coins ))
I like the process of taking all juices from hardware and software parts, not bargain, etc ...

[Slava_K]

Plz look on argon2 algo... SP_ its try to big profit!

[joblo]

2 joblo

I'm taking btc from eth mining with amd (red camp) and ready to give to improve green camp :lol:

Sorry, no follow.

[AzzAz]

980 results  ( 2 MSI 980 GAMING and 1 Gigabyte 980 G1 GAMING ) all clocked core +105,

 Quark, Nicehash:

  sp miner 78 free: 63270                   sp miner private:   66145

Gigabyte G1 Gaming is 5% faster than MSI 4G here, same price...