Quote from: Carlton Banks on June 30, 2014, 04:28:13 PM

Quote from: cathoderay on June 30, 2014, 02:13:20 PM

Bigmouths? Mature. Impressive.

You know not what you say. GTFO.

Quote from: IYFTech on June 30, 2014, 02:25:02 PM

You sound much more intelligent & grown-up in the press thread. Please go back there.

Quote from: PatMan on June 30, 2014, 02:17:47 PM

That's just a sad statement. If you have nothing constructive to spout, please don't bother. Some people here are actually trying to do something about it.

Idiot.

Wait a second, is this your way of telling everyone that you're some of the people who've been blaming the wrong developers for Bitmain devices not working? I don't actually recognise any of you, except Patman, who I thought always understood that the problem was on the hardware/firmware side. Will the real bigmouth please stand up!

What's ironic is that users don't understand that it's an interface problem and that there are 2 parts in an interface. As p2pool's interface fully respect the Bitcoin and pool protocols if your hardware doesn't work at all, you might have a bigger problem that not being able to use p2pool : if pool operators need to change their software and implement some of the protocol options p2pool already use, the hardware will suddenly stop producing income until they find about the problem, find an alternative pool or upgrade their firmware.

If this is a latency problem instead of a protocol support problem, trying to solve it on p2pool's end is OK in the short term (and the only person working on this right now is forrestv). But if you have a measurable latency problems with an average 30 second window of valid block template, you probably lose a few % of income on any pool too (even if it's less than on p2pool which will have more DOA). So ultimately solving the latency problem on the hardware/firmware is the only way of ensuring the best income on all pools (p2pool or not). Seeing users blaming large amounts of DOA on p2pool while ignoring that they are actively losing income on any pool by not pressuring the vendors to solve this is baffling.

When you compare the quality of ASIC hardware, which is often reported as being delivered in a beat-up state, with forked miner software and dodgy firmware and how stable p2pool is, the double-standard about quality is obvious. Miners are now used to crappy hardware and the fact that hardware manufacturers don't give a **** about their product once they have sold them (some even don't deliver...). This thread is a sad illustration of this situation.

BTW : maybe some Bitfury hardware doesn't work with p2pool, but clearly the chips themselves don't have high latencies or any inherent p2pool incompatibility, CryptX bitfury boards are working nicely with p2pool for ~9 months now