3 ms·
Given that every day more people browse the web on relatively weaker handheld devices running on batteries I have a hard time believing that most people will be
by simias 9y ago
Given that every day more people browse the web on relatively weaker handheld devices running on batteries I have a hard time believing that most people will be fine with having websites drain their batteries and if it becomes commonplace I expect that many people will block them.
And remember that mining is effectively a zero-sum game, the more people mine the harder it becomes to mine. It effectively means that every new websites who switches to mining for monetization makes it less valuable for all the other websites already doing it since you're all sharing the same cake.
- bitL 9y ago> is effectively a zero-sum game That's only true for deflationary currencies. One can conjure up an ad-replacement currency, let's call it impre$$ion, that would be inflationary and perhaps linearly related to the time spent on the page regardless of computing performance of a viewer (though some viewers might be more valuable than others, e.g. those running iOS). Then there could be a separate market/stock-exchange for impre$$ions, replacing ad income. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar was in the works already.
- bpicolo 9y agoThere'd be no reason whatsoever for such an imaginary currency to have any value.
- prepend 9y agoThese are good points, but the mining is really minimal. Considering that I’m content sites I run, I make less than 1 cent per visitor for an average 4 minute session. 75 of sessions are between 3-8 minutes. So I don’t need to mine a ton, just a little bit. I would actually be cool with a micro transaction program where I just paid them a penny if I thought the visit was worthwhile. I really liked the flattr model.