5 ms·
In other words, you won't get rich trying to mine bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from your home. Because if there's money to be made, many others will jump i
by jatsign 7y ago
In other words, you won't get rich trying to mine bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from your home. Because if there's money to be made, many others will jump in. To get rich, you'd need some advantage, like incredibly low cost of power.
- genericacct 7y ago..for values of incredibly low cost that equal stolen
- Scoundreller 7y agoToday, yes. But in the past, all you needed to be profitable was some kind of advantage, such as not valuing your time, a video card that sits around doing nothing anyway, a use for the heat byproduct (such as room heating). At scale, there are expenses that the hobbyist doesn’t have. The hobbyist already has space, climate control, doesn’t need/get business licenses, etc. But it can be hard to compete with any trifecta that can scale with cheap land, labour and capital.
- seibelj 7y agoProof of Stake currencies do not require more power than a desktop PC or reasonably sized cloud server to run a node. Cosmos (https://cosmos.network/ https://cosmos.network/) is one such currency, and Ethereum is moving to a PoS system.
- wyldfire 7y agoProof of Stake is a great idea, Nano is one that does DPoS. But the downside is that it doesn't provide an equitable distribution. IMO a rare or periodic PoW 'burst' might be a good compromise there.
- DennisP 7y agoSeems to me it's at least as equitable as PoW. With either one, you get returns in linear proportion to the resources you commit. To the extent that miners have economies of scale, PoS actually does better.
- gcb0 7y agobut it distills nicely to a dichotomy of two terms that can easily be discussed on forums by "investors" who do not understand the first thing about the underlying tech they are buying into. So you will hear about it for a while, as being the ultimate game changer no less.