It's sad to see that you were sick and lost friend, but don't accuse community of betraying you - community needed help and support, and part of the community choosed what is best for it.
Do you realise that 0.5% defvee is only 18 seconds per hour? Last time you claimed that your miner had 1% devfee and it's just a lie, because devfee actually is 70 seconds per hour and it's 1.94%
Let me give you good advice - never include destructive code in your software - only ordinary users will suffer from it.
1) I'm not accusing anyone, I've just posted two ways of thinking on the same problem, nothing more. And container is a shit when it comes to mining, doesn't matter how good it is, it will cost nothing without proper kernel. Which you can't say about kernel, give it input, you'll receive output, volia, solution, check it against target, volia, proper solution, not so much code, isn't it?
So "container is shit"? Interesting, probably that's why you decided not to spend time on coding own "container" and just took ccminer
2) The lie is that you do it for community, you do it only because I've hurted your oversized Ego, and don't think you've hidden your personality under this new account
I understand that you feel yourself little dizzy after hospital, but you have mixed something up. I didn't even know who are you before I've started to use hsrminer in december. And with my fork I've actually helped people and they are grateful to me.
Are you right about devfee? Partially, man, partially, because dev pool connection is not momental, that value highly differs for every user and that doesn't mean that I gain anything from client connecting to server, only fools think so, for some users full dev time was 38-45 secs, for some it could take more as in your case. Even calculating this, kernel speed gave much more profit for end users, much more, none've pushed Neooscrypt so high before me on Pascal architecture and you're just a parasite in that case, you can write hundreds of reveals and investigations, that will change nothing.
Maybe in your perfect world users follow devs, idea, community, etc., in real world the only thing users follow is money.
In your case users switched for functionality, nothing more, so your crown is made of chocolate, man, be careful, chocolate's melting sometimes.
And let's make it bold!!!! 14528731478% DEVFEE, beware, liar, thief, criminal, freedom, ZOG, HOLD THE DOOR, hold the door, holdthdor, Hotdor, Hodor!!!
Too much words, too much emotions, too little facts. Okay guys, here we go. There are two work timelimits inside hsrminer - one is for user pool, and one is for devfee pool. Mr. Palgin set user pool work timelimit to exactly
3530 seconds, it's 58 minutes 50 seconds, and he set devfee pool work timelimit to exactly
70 seconds. How it all works - after miner works on user pool for 3530 seconds, it disconnects and switches pool to devfee one and mine there for 70 seconds. 3530+70=3600 - we get full hour. So every hour miner doesn't work for user pool at least 70 seconds - it's minus 1.94% income for user.
Mr. Palgin is saying us that he doesn't get enough devfee due to non-momental pool switching, etc - but user doesn't need to care about that and suffer from that- user already lost 1.94% of income. And it doesn't matter for user if miner is actually mining whole 70 seconds during devfee period, or just doing nothing, trying to connect to devfee pool - user ALREADY lost 1.94% of his income.
Furthemore, after switching from devfee pool back to user pool - user experiences same problems that Mr. Palgin was complained about - miner can't instantly connect to user pool and start work, instead it waits work from user pool and due to badly optimized switch-pool code wait time can vary anywhere from 5 to 30 seconds. So 70 seconds of devfee period plus up to 30 seconds to get back to user pool and start working - 75-100 seconds, and it's
2.08% - 2.75% of lost income instead of claimed 1% for any user that uses original hsrminer.
This is real world and not cinema. As Mr. Palgin said: "in real world the only thing users follow is money". I let myself to add that in real world it's not easy to separate good guys from bad ones, as almost everyone is somewhere in between. So Mr. Palgin pretends to be a good guy, and calls me "attacker", "hacker", i.e. bad guy. Well I'm flattered.
But let's see all the lies that Mr. "Good Guy" Palgin told us:
1) Product contains devfee 1% (0.5% for me, 0.5% for alexkap)
Confirmed Palgin's lie, any original hsrminer user lose from
2.08% to
2.75% of income due to devfee pool switching - see above. But real devfee % would scare users away, so Mr. Palgin decided to claim that devfee is 1% which is obvious lie. Mr. Palgin is a smart guy, he creates fast cuda kernels, he knows math well, he couldn't make silly mistake calculating devfee %. Claiming fake low devfee % was done intentionally to attract more users.
2) F.A.Q (will be updated basing on frequent questions in this topic):
Q: hsrminer looks quite like ccminer...
A: True, in early builds it really was ~30% ccminer code (especially monitoring), but now only data output is quite the same. Also we'll migrate to new frontend after algo coverage.
Confirmed Palgin's lie, I've thoroughly reverse-engineered hsrminer and know every byte of it and it contains
99% of ccminer code. Mr. Palgin just erased code parts that related to other algos (as ccminer is multialgo miner), changed user messages and add logo. Of course there are kernels, but we are talking about "shitty container" here, right? As for kernels I'm sure they were not written from scratch too - Mr. Palgin took open-source ones like tpruvot or klaust and improved them.
3) 9xx family and lower not supported in this release.
Confirmed Palgin's lie. Even without source code I was able to add support for GTX 970, 980, 980 Ti to my fork and it's workability confirmed by users -
1,
2But 9xx GPUs doesn't give much hashrate and won't give Palgin much devfee, so he decided - why bother about it?
4) Yes, it's not over yet. Do you guys wonder why original hsrminer doesn't have API and benchmark, doesn't have "-r" option, doesn't have many useful ccminer options despite the fact that it's actually ccminer with different kernels and logo?
It's because Mr. "Good Guy" Palgin
intentionally disabled API, deleted parts of the code that handle those useful options and especially "-r" option. It was done because API and those options could interfere with his devfee. So I as the "Bad Guy" had to add all those features back in my fork, working without access to source code, so people could actually use this miner instead of just paying devfee.
Mr. Palgin claims that all those features are just unnecessary things, and main thing is his fast cuda kernel. Well Mr. Palgin, miner without ability to exit if connection to pool was interrupted ( -r option) is just a joke because even fastest cuda-kernel won't pay for those losses user would get in case of pool's inaccessibility - his rigs would idle without work for hours - it's my personal experience with original hsrminer.
So Mr. Palgin, users follow money? All we can see from 1), 2), 3), 4) is that you are the one who care about money (devfee) most.
If users followed your logic - they all would instantly switch to my fork because of reasons described in
1),
3) and
4). Yes, 2) doesn't count here, it's just little addition to your "Good Guy" portrait
Get over yourself - fix topic description and miner logo - your claimed 1% devfee is blatant lie, bruh.
