Claymore / Transparancy

glenn_txglenn_tx Member Posts: 67
Don't get me wrong. I"m totally fine with paying for an app, especially if it makes me money and is better than the competition. The 1% fee for ETH and the additional 1% fee for DCR/SIA was perfect. I'm in/from the financial industry. 1% is standard for a service. It's common to have multiple services on the same money, so 1, up to 2% is typical. Now the fee for ZEC is 2.5%. Add in the pool fee, and we're starting to see a good chunk of money being taken out. Is it higher 'just because he can' or is if for a good reason?

More importantly, the lack of transparency on the 'fee' is a bit disconcerting. Boysie did a good write up on the uncanny luck of Claymore to pick up shares during it's 'time' of mining. In almost any transaction these days, especially with technology, you know EXACTLY how much you are paying (and how much the seller is getting), usually INSTANTLY. Charts and graphs are common. Do any of you know exactly how much Claymore is getting?

Let me go back to my original statement. It's great software. He deserves a percentage. I don't mind paying. I just wish I knew exactly how much work my miners are doing for him (And I wish it didn't keep going up and up..) (Please don't flame me. It's just a conversation)
«1

Comments

  • storpstorp Member Posts: 23
    Well spoken! I also don't mind paying a fee but it would be nice to know how much the fee actually is. It can't be to hard to implement and show the statistics. Transparency builds trust.
  • Franco_ozFranco_oz Member Posts: 21
    Only my 2ct opinion here.
    Read his read_me, it clearly state "If you disagree, do not use my miner"
    It's all in there.
    I have 10 rigs, his software makes me earn more than any other miner. Trust me, as an electronic engineer I know how to build well optimized rigs and done lots of research. Genoil is brilliant but Claymore is few steps ahead. No one forced me to use his miner.
    Do your own research, it's not that hard to extrapolate all the infos you need.
    Again, it's my opinion only.
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    There was a thread about most this already... I have tracked claymore devfee since shortly after the first ethdualminer release. I posted a graph of devfee over 24hr that shows it averages to slightly under 1%.

    As for the 2.5% fee on zec - it makes total sense. There were already decent eth miners out with comparable hashrate when claymore released his dual miner. And you pay 2% if you use the premium dual feature. His zec miner seems to crush everything else available, so it itself is the premium feature.
  • oslakoslak Member Posts: 191
    @work I only get to block his fees but miners seems slow after targeting all his packets. Better restart it when logs sees his "dev fee" notice. I like your idea of making his share sent to your address instead of his.
  • leroy627leroy627 Member Posts: 12
    edited November 2016
    Anyone else knows his total earning(From ETHMiner only)? It's quite stunning tbh...
  • glenn_txglenn_tx Member Posts: 67
    edited November 2016
    I don't mind paying a fee. I never said I didn't agree with paying a fee. If I found money manager that could earn me 20% instead of 8%, I would be willing to pay more than the standard 1%. However, in that case, I would see the EXACT amount in my statement. I would KNOW what I'm paying. I'm just asking for transparency. Call it a 'feature request', if you must. It wouldn't be hard to add a column to the Claymore Manager showing number of shares sent to developer.
  • neokensouneokensou Member Posts: 21
    Yeah, it could be great have more transparency from the application.

    But I think this way to earn money because his work It is the best way to do it. I'm sure if it would be a paid appication, people would try to get it for free or trying other miners. Good job Claymore.
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    @glenn_tx you could review the logs to determine exactly how much work is being done for the dev. It's not hidden. Not sure what more transparency you want.
  • glenn_txglenn_tx Member Posts: 67
    work said:

    @glenn_tx you could review the logs to determine exactly how much work is being done for the dev. It's not hidden. Not sure what more transparency you want.

    That's like saying, "I know I didn't list the commission I charged you for this stock trade, but you can just multiply "shares times price", then whatever is left over is the commission". Yea, that's true, but the financial industry figured out that customers LIKE seeing the commission spelled out separately, so they don't have to dig into it.

    Let me say it again. This isn't a complaint. It's a request for enhancement, and that enhancement happens to be transparency.
  • leroy627leroy627 Member Posts: 12
    @glenn_tx , you can't really do much more than shares*price, claymore's addresses on pools have quite a few miners on it at a time..
  • glenn_txglenn_tx Member Posts: 67
    edited November 2016
    leroy627 said:

    @glenn_tx , you can't really do much more than shares*price, claymore's addresses on pools have quite a few miners on it at a time..

    Huh? I don't really care how much Claymore makes. I hope he makes oodles of cash. I want to know EXACTLY what MY miners are doing, not just what they 'should' be doing, or 'supposed' to be doing.

    Edit: Again, I'm not 'complaining', I'm politely requesting.

    Edit: If I had to choose between Claymore getting a fee and transparency, I would prefer Claymore getting a fee. The ideal situation would be both.
  • leroy627leroy627 Member Posts: 12
    edited November 2016

    ^^His address, which has like 10++ people mining on it an any given time, all under worker name "default"

    @glenn_tx Point: Even if you add your own worker name when mining devfee, all you will get is the amount of shares that you find, you can't really calculate your exact 'commission'.
    If you can't understand that, then I wish you good luck in your goals.
  • wirelessnet2wirelessnet2 Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    Well now there's a nofee feature in the zec miner. There you go.
  • SWDude26SWDude26 Member Posts: 132 ✭✭
    Claymore is a standup guy.

    Use the nofee option or don't use his miners are all if you're going to bitch about it.

    Not directed at OP, but @ everyone in general who's complaining about it now.

    He's had a fee in all his miners (ethereum anyone?) And now it's become a trend among several of us miners to post these questions and complain. Let us put an end to it now. It needs to stop. He deserves that fee for his work.
  • newmznewmz AustraliaMember Posts: 299 ✭✭✭
    Well there is also the option of using the silent army miner. No fee, similar hash rate to Claymore, but I think you currently have to be able to use Linux or buy an Ethos license. I just swapped to the latest silent army binaries in Ethos and went from 420 sol to 775 sol. I have never used Claymore because I like using Ethos and it's Linux based. If you can use Linux you can get Ubuntu for free, compile silent army yourself for free. Complete transperancy, no fee. Just saying.
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    @leroy627 lol... that is a tiny piece of the story. Claymore has a LOT of addresses he uses for the devfee, there definitely isn't just one (I have a full list for each version - not hard to get... it's a big list). Using only one payout address for the devfee would have been beyond stupid.

    I still don't get what more transparency you want from Claymore. If you are too lazy to have a basic share stat tracking layer in your mining stack, then just keep on keeping on, and forget about it. It's relatively trivial code/protocol layer that any miner spending any real amount of time and effort in this industry should probably be running.
    You SERIOUSLy don't track your shares for discovered blocks to make sure the pool in honest? what? wwwHAT?? Crazy if you ask me...
  • leroy627leroy627 Member Posts: 12
    edited November 2016
    @work Well, I was only bothered to check it on the latest version, which I'm sure is used most.
    Did notice that it empties out into another eth address though, time to torture google sheets to calculate a couple thousand values again.

    Edit : Oh my....
  • SWDude26SWDude26 Member Posts: 132 ✭✭
    newmz said:

    Well there is also the option of using the silent army miner. No fee, similar hash rate to Claymore, but I think you currently have to be able to use Linux or buy an Ethos license. I just swapped to the latest silent army binaries in Ethos and went from 420 sol to 775 sol. I have never used Claymore because I like using Ethos and it's Linux based. If you can use Linux you can get Ubuntu for free, compile silent army yourself for free. Complete transperancy, no fee. Just saying.

    If you're a linux user I would hands down use Silent Army. Don't get me wrong I can use linux w/o issue, I just prefer Windows :) EXCEPT WHEN IT FUKKKING FREEZES DURING MINING FRIDAY NIGHT!!! Now I either have to drive 30 minutes to reboot the fucker (tis at work) or wait till Monday and miss out on some sweet dough this weekend. My AC Power IP switch comes in Monday... /rant
  • noonwaynoonway Member Posts: 11
    work said:

    @leroy627 lol... that is a tiny piece of the story. Claymore has a LOT of addresses he uses for the devfee, there definitely isn't just one (I have a full list for each version - not hard to get... it's a big list). Using only one payout address for the devfee would have been beyond stupid.

    I still don't get what more transparency you want from Claymore. If you are too lazy to have a basic share stat tracking layer in your mining stack, then just keep on keeping on, and forget about it. It's relatively trivial code/protocol layer that any miner spending any real amount of time and effort in this industry should probably be running.
    You SERIOUSLy don't track your shares for discovered blocks to make sure the pool in honest? what? wwwHAT?? Crazy if you ask me...

    @work, no we rely on professional miners like you to keep the pools honest and tell us where to put our power. ;)
  • glenn_txglenn_tx Member Posts: 67
    Those of you that are bitching about the discussion, you should read a little closer. I specifically said I wasn't 'complaining'. How many times to I need to say that for you to see it?

    Is there a feature already built into the monitor that breaks out % of shares mined by the dev fee? If so, can you show me where?

    If not, is it so horrible to request a new feature which would detail how many shares I'm mining for someone else?

    For those that want to shut down the discussion because you are so sure you're right, where are you from? Russia? China?
  • leroy627leroy627 Member Posts: 12
    edited November 2016
    glenn_tx said:


    Is there a feature already built into the monitor that breaks out % of shares mined by the dev fee? If so, can you show me where?

    If not, is it so horrible to request a new feature which would detail how many shares I'm mining for someone else?

    For those that want to shut down the discussion because you are so sure you're right, where are you from? Russia? China?

    %Of shares mined by devfee depends on what pool it is, and all pools have different difficulties.
    Assuming you mine on the same pool as devfee, roughly 1%, depending on luck.

    Also, I'm sorry but I thought
    glenn_tx said:

    That's like saying, "I know I didn't list the commission I charged you for this stock trade, but you can just multiply "shares times price", then whatever is left over is the commission". Yea, that's true, but the financial industry figured out that customers LIKE seeing the commission spelled out separately, so they don't have to dig into it.


    Anyway, good luck!
    p/s Claymore isn't active on this forum, head over to btctalk and suggest on his thread.
  • prodigy2006prodigy2006 Member Posts: 15
    yeah right... like some other members on this forum I tested and found claymore devfee not as advertised by him so I think we can bitch about this as much as we like, also looking at his devfee addresses he does make more than enough, each address has at least 1000USD in crypto on it and filling up fast...

    And plz spare me the - don't use if you dont like crap... I dont care about your opinion if you are that dumb. Claymore is cheating...
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2016
    @prodigy2006 please provide evidence of your rediculous claims. I have exact share/packet logs tracking Claymore's devfee over many months and many versions, and he absolutely in no way is "cheating". His devfee is exactly what he says it is - in fact, it averages out to slightly (very slightly) less then 1% of all shares.

    Post your test methodology and results, or stop spewing bullshit. Because you're wrong - period.

    Further, what do you mean, "each of his addresses" - have you actually collected the entire list? Somehow I doubt it. How many?
  • oslakoslak Member Posts: 191
    Aw. Let's just close this thread.
  • prodigy2006prodigy2006 Member Posts: 15
    @work not that it matters but also after months of monitoring yes more than enough and if you are also carefully monitoring claymore why do you need us to provide evidence for you? Respectfully, living in oblivion is usually more comfortable.

    @oslak agreed, this thread should be closed, it has no further purpose.
  • MineallnightMineallnight Member Posts: 21

    yeah right... like some other members on this forum I tested and found claymore devfee not as advertised by him so I think we can bitch about this as much as we like, also looking at his devfee addresses he does make more than enough, each address has at least 1000USD in crypto on it and filling up fast...

    And plz spare me the - don't use if you dont like crap... I dont care about your opinion if you are that dumb. Claymore is cheating...

    $1000's of dollars? LOL dude claymore has made tens of millions of dollars....He deserves it too, he makes the best miners.
  • glenn_txglenn_tx Member Posts: 67
    Why to people equate a request of transparency as an accusation of cheating? Reagan had it right. "Trust but verify". May not be possible in a monopoly.
  • BUTUZBUTUZ Member Posts: 139 ✭✭
    If you don't like the 1% pool fee - feel free to mine solo and earn zero.
    If you don't like the Zec Dev fee - feel free to mine bitcoins and earn zero
    If you don't like claymores ~2% fee - feel free to close it and earn zero.

    Life is about choice, if you make a choice, don't moan about it because YOU chose it!

  • seanbw1609seanbw1609 Member Posts: 19
    I can't drive but have a car. My neighbour can drive. He drives my car and then stops at the fuel station, says give me your wallet I need to purchase fuel and oh by the way, as I am driving your car but you are getting to work, I will buy breakfast from the fuel money I take from your wallet. Same on the way back when I buy dinner.
    Be assured I will only take 1% of the fuel we buy but I won't tell you how much. When we get home, just count the money left in your wallet.
    Now you are the kind of guy that likes to know just how much everything is so it really irks you that he can't be bothered to tell you how much the 1% is each morning and evening but as you can't drive, you really have no choice.
    Sure other drivers are in your neighbourhood but he is the fastest driver around and when he arrives at the fuel station, uncannily, he always seem to be the only person that goes into the office to pay. No one seems to be able to accompany him so at least they will get an inkling of how much he actually pays. Somehow every morning and evening, he always arrives at the filling station, buys the fuel and grabs breaky and dinner with no one being the wiser about how much he is actually flogging over.
    You then get home and look through your wallet but since you didn't remember to start the checking on the Monday when this scenario started, all you can do is scratch your head and calculate backwards to ascertain that truly he is buying only 1% each time.
    You are not an accountant by training and lots of loose change always seems to complicate matters making it even more difficult to calculate.
    You ask him and he says look, I can get to the office on my own steam. If you don't want, I can get my other neighbour to do the same deal. You realise that even if the 1% he is supposed to take is difficult to confirm , you are still better off so you keep quiet.
    Sounds like the old type of corrupt Governments we used to get before people realised that they could get better if only they opened their mouths and ask for one and are willing to fight for it. Even reminds me of the current Russian one. Something is better than nothing but I think we have progressed farther than this in the west. There is nothing wrong with asking for transparency and if people don't see that, I suggest they re-examine themselves.
    You need a bank these days. Imagine they say - at the end of the month, calculate your balances yourselves. We don't issue statements. You technically can do without banks - if you can negotiate with all suppliers, Government offices etc but man, it will be a stretch. So like the repressed weak kneed citizens you are, you slink away to grumble in your tea whilst the apologist next door tells you what a wonderful facility these banks are providing only for 1% of your money and you say but we can't even say its 1% and he says Sure you can. They won't take more than 1% - he says cheerily. I trust them explicitly after all, they said so.
    And you feel this urge to go inside your house, start the chainsaw and smilingly cut him into two all the while saying cheerily - it won't hurt me one bit - I promise you after all, I am not the person being cut.
    A brilliant developer like Claymore can easily add the calculator to display and record transparently the results of the 1% fee if he wants. That he doesn't and people are asking for it and others are butting in saying yes - he said "you don't have to use his technology" completely miss the point.
    OP has said he does not mind paying but he would like to know how much the 1% is coming to - what si wrong in that?
    When did we become a closed society?
    I think the Claymore defenders need to step back and ask - why not?
    If you are being paid for services rendered - that is fine.
    If you are being paid for services rendered and only the payee knows the value of the amount he is being paid - and people don't feel something is drastically wrong - maybe I can sell them the air they are breathing - after all - I have a tree in my garden....
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    What more do you want to know then the exact number of shares submitted for the devfee? ... there really isn't more data then that.
Sign In or Register to comment.