Quote from: achow101 on April 28, 2017, 03:17:40 AM

Quote from: freedomno1 on April 28, 2017, 03:09:41 AM

Reading the patch thread the remote kill is needed if someone confiscates the mining units or steals em.
Seems a bit overkill though but in the name of coin security someone would appreciate the feature and phone home does the job.

The problem I have with this explanation is that the way the kill switch was implemented is way more complex and convoluted than it needs to be. It sounds like what they had done was fully implemented the feature but not the rest of the service they were going to provide, but they implemented this feature in such a weird way. The phone home code sets a global variable which is then read by another completely unrelated thread which sets another global variable which is what then actually does the mining shutdown part when the machine requests work. That is just way more complicated than it needs to be. The full feature could have just been implemented in the same function that they wrote for the phoning home, but instead it sets global variables used by other functions and threads.

I tend to imagine a meme whenever someone codes a convoluted means to solving a puzzle. Of course this one was an incomplete version of it so maybe it was just global for testing and forgotten but as you pointed out there are better ways to get the cogs set up.

Then there is what they teach people in school
"Commenting is the "art" of describing what your program is going to do in "high level" English statements."
(With a slight snicker to anyone that can say that with a straight face to a room of coders)
http://www.cs.utah.edu/~germain/PPS/Topics/commenting.html

But usually code just follows the easiest route which is using global vars to test it out and in this case presumes the other person can just magically use interpretation to figure what it all does. Hence Open-Source code.

"The controversy around this code has brought our attention to improve the design in order to address vulnerabilities that were pointed out by the community recently."

All in all looks like a lesson in beta-testing has occurred another good day in Development land ^^.

Quote from: Spondoolies-Tech on April 28, 2017, 03:43:55 AM

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/great-north-data-bitmain-technologies-lawsuit-1.4084925

I can see why they would be pissed with the Chinese group for running the miners and wanted to brick them all remotely. Now it all makes sense ^^. That kill-switch is a don't tread on me flag and nuclear revenge button all in one.

(Nice find its in Cbc Beta too)

___
"In 2017, Bitmains own miners were withheld and sold without its consent in Canada." (Bitmain mini-note)

(Neither Bitmain nor Great North Data is doing interviews, but their lawyers both issued statements.

Daniel Simmons, the lawyer representing Great North Data, noted in an email to CBC News that the company "continues to carry on business as usual without interruption at its facilities in Labrador."

Meanwhile, Megan Taylor, who represents Bitmain, says her client "has no direct knowledge of the current status of their equipment," and Great North is no longer hosting for Bitmain.)

--
As an aside I never put together the place the Vikings visited on Discover Canada ad's and the great powerful hashing of Bitcoin but that's not a bad way to boost the economy of the New Fy's besides offshore drilling, as long as you find the right partners the wheels will keep chugging on the Bitcoin economy.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/data-storage-bitcoins-western-labrador-1.3694238