CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[djm34]

by the way your standard public release triggers an alert from malwarebyte. Can you tell exactly what you did (rel 74 too) ?
I don't get that kind of shit with mine, are editing register or things like that for some reason ?

ps: I am pretty sure it is benign, but none of the other release does that

[s7icky]

Uhhh...

https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/f4df1e75023abe281787dfb71d8767169ea77b922c003f972e71bfdcd222d4c0/analysis/

[Al_may]

by the way your standard public release triggers an alert from malwarebyte. Can you tell exactly what you did (rel 74 too) ?
I don't get that kind of shit with mine, are editing register or things like that for some reason ?

ps: I am pretty sure it is benign, but none of the other release does that

yes back with ver 64 i had a major problem but in 65 it went away. it showed back up in .74 and is still a problem. the program is running bitcoinminer.exe in the back ground, as per Malwarebyte

[zTheWolfz]

kind of sounds like what I suspected since I seen a loss in coins rather than a gain, perhaps he has impaled it to mine part of our hash to his own wallet?

[djm34]

by the way your standard public release triggers an alert from malwarebyte. Can you tell exactly what you did (rel 74 too) ?
I don't get that kind of shit with mine, are editing register or things like that for some reason ?

ps: I am pretty sure it is benign, but none of the other release does that

yes back with ver 64 i had a major problem but in 65 it went away. it showed back up in .74 and is still a problem. the program is running bitcoinminer.exe in the back ground, as per Malwarebyte

I don't think it is really running a bitcoinminer, but I don't like to release something (since I have to use it for the neoscrypt release, and the exe I compile from the source gets flagged by malwarebyte...) which is flagged by virus scanners... so it would be good that sp_ correct that asap

[sp_]

False positives guys.. Compile for youself and check. Sgminer and ccminer are being used by botnets. Antivirus software doesn't like mining software.

[djm34]

False positives guys.. Compile for youself and check. Sgminer and ccminer are being used by botnets. Antivirus software doesn't like mining software.

yes I compile for myself your release, and get these alert.
Strangely when I compile my version, I don't get them, so there must be something doing it

so it is something in your code which does that

[sp_]

False positives guys.. Compile for youself and check. Sgminer and ccminer are being used by botnets. Antivirus software doesn't like mining software.

yes I compile for myself your release, and get these alert.
Strangely when I compile my version, I don't get them, so there must be something doing it
so it is something in your code which does that

Because the botnets doesn't use your version because it is slow. Antivirus software is scanning patterns in exe files right?..

[djm34]

False positives guys.. Compile for youself and check. Sgminer and ccminer are being used by botnets. Antivirus software doesn't like mining software.

yes I compile for myself your release, and get these alert.
Strangely when I compile my version, I don't get them, so there must be something doing it
so it is something in your code which does that

Because the botnets doesn't use your version because it is slow. Antivirus software is scanning patterns in exe files right?..

have no idea what it is scanning...

[sp_]

Download ccminer1.2 from github in google chrome. It will be blocked.
https://github.com/cbuchner1/ccminer/releases

Most likely because a trojan/virus has included this exefile in their archieve.
Ccminer is safe.

[djm34]

Download ccminer1.2 from github in google chrome. It will be blocked.
https://github.com/cbuchner1/ccminer/releases

Most likely because a trojan/virus has included this exefile in their archieve.
Ccminer is safe.

I don't use chrome it is a piece of crap which raise alert with malwarebyte all the time

[sp_]

From release 2 to 3 quark was improved. The other improvements was on compute 5.2 devices. Release private 4 has been released with more quark and lyra2v2 on the 750ti.


On the asus strix 750ti standard clocks. (vs release 74)
lyra2v2: +6.26%
quark: +2.1%

compared to release 3
lyra2v2: +0,46%
 quark:  +0.3%
In sp private #4 the gigabyte windforce g1 970 is peaking at 10.7 MHASH on factory clocks. This is around what the original djm34 kernal did on the gtx 980. My code turns your gtx 970 into a gtx 980..

0.46% means nothing (except that people buying into that are bad in maths...)
actually you always claim increase by either comparing to your old stuff (or mine) while there is no difference between your various private release

But 6.26% does. Actually if you have a gtx 960 the gain is more than 10%. The +0.46% is just a free upgrade. The donators are on my list and will recieve new versions when the opensource miner get faster.

[djm34]

From release 2 to 3 quark was improved. The other improvements was on compute 5.2 devices. Release private 4 has been released with more quark and lyra2v2 on the 750ti.


On the asus strix 750ti standard clocks. (vs release 74)
lyra2v2: +6.26%
quark: +2.1%

compared to release 3
lyra2v2: +0,46%
 quark:  +0.3%
In sp private #4 the gigabyte windforce g1 970 is peaking at 10.7 MHASH on factory clocks. This is around what the original djm34 kernal did on the gtx 980. My code turns your gtx 970 into a gtx 980..

0.46% means nothing (except that people buying into that are bad in maths...)
actually you always claim increase by either comparing to your old stuff (or mine) while there is no difference between your various private release

But 6.26% does. Actually if you have a gtx 960 the gain is more than 10%. The +0.46% is just a free upgrade. The donators are on my list and will recieve new versions when the opensource miner get faster.

so basically you expect other dev to work on the opensource so to make your private miner faster
pallas says thank you to you 

[sp_]

My git is still active. Just submitted a 0.2% increase in lyra2v2.

[Eliovp]

These endless discussions. Got to give it to you guys. I would have given up a long time ago 

[djm34]

My git is still active. Just submitted a 0.2% increase in lyra2v2.

yeah I saw you commited something you removed... still the same activity as usual... half of the change which happens are just to correct some shit you put it in at the previous round...  

It isn't release 78, actually it is more likely 39 (in terms of real progress). 
Seriously can't you just check what you are doing before committing anything 

[djm34]

These endless discussions. Got to give it to you guys. I would have given up a long time ago 

I try to put some discussions, otherwise it would look like some endless call for donation 

[bensam1231]

It isn't new nor secret that Wolf0 has been working for quite some time on a new miners (he might be able to make more accurate statement if he passes by), things like that are more often discussed on #ccminer.

I always respect the work of other people so if someone include a gpl licensing, and I happen to use that piece of code, then I keep it as I found it with the licensing. (also as you don't seem to know, even though I repeat it all the time, I don't release private really often... so 98.5% of the time, when I release something it is directly on github wirh proper licensing and the other time, the code is even given with the binaries).

And again it isn't about what other may or may not understand  (which I don't really care) it is just the way it should be done.
I want people to deal with my code the proper way, so don't expect me to deal with other people code differently.

Alright, so it's the way 'you' do things...

As I've mentioned before, a miner fee is the best way of supporting developers long term while they work on improving their miner. It scales to both small and large miners. So if you don't care about picking apart the rats nest of licensing most people don't care about, then a miner fee works fine. All the GPL code is available to everyone already anyway, so people aren't losing out on that GPL code if it's not freely available. They're losing out on the kernel optimizations, which really have nothing to do with the GPL code, hence why we talked about something like a blackbox miner.

If you're really worried you could post the rest of the miner without the kernels next to it so people have it readily available and can see what it's built off of (not that anyone cares).

Two versions, one without the kernel and one with the kernel that isn't opensource. I'm sure they'll understand your spirit of keeping things alive. ^^


Ethereum is still hot guys, you should be mining, Nvidia or not.

[sp_]

My git is still active. Just submitted a 0.2% increase in lyra2v2.

yeah I saw you commited something you removed... still the same activity as usual... half of the change which happens are just to correct some shit you put it in at the previous round...  

It isn't release 78, actually it is more likely 39 (in terms of real progress). 
Seriously can't you just check what you are doing before committing anything 

Stop trolling and finish your pledge miner. 

[sp_]

so basically you expect other dev to work on the opensource so to make your private miner faster
pallas says thank you to you 

I will study your new optimized Neoscrypt code and learn.
You should study my code as well. We use different ways to reach our goal. I do small compiler/assembly optimalizations while you are reinventing the algorithm. You should buy my private miner and analyze it. I will give you a discount of 0.05 BTC.