8 ms·

I smell bullshit. Sounds like the company tried it, got caught, and blamed it on a (fictitious?) rogue employee.

by wilfra 13y ago

d23 13y ago
> In just a couple of weeks, he netted close to BTC30, or about $3,700. You honestly think the company would risk something like that for such a small amount of money?
- wilfra 13y ago
  I think they acknowledged they were willing to risk it by considering it in the first place.
  - modarts 13y ago
    That's what I found to be strange too. Why was it ever considered?
    - Daniel_Newby 13y ago
      Customers with a low cost of electricity and a hot GPU could have used it to offset the cost of their subscription. They would not have needed to learn anything about Bitcoin or manage their own financial account.
      - bigiain 13y ago
        Hmmm, I wonder if you could somehow plot bitcoin mining rates against location and temperature/climate? I wonder if there are people who selectively turn on their mining boxen to use as room heaters, effectively getting the computation (and bitcoins) "for free" since they'd be consuming the power for heating anyway?
        skarmklart 13y ago
        Yes, it's not unheard of.
        modarts 13y ago
        Thoughts like this are why I love this site.
    - bigiain 13y ago
      "the company considered" has a quite wide range of possible interpretations. It could mean anything from "a few developers bullshitted about it in the lunch room", through to "the board oversaw prototype development and approved a pilot deployment to measure public response" - which are _clearly_ very different scenarios. Unfortunately, while it's easy to distinguish those two meanings at a large company, as you try to distinguish the intent at smaller and smaller companies, the differences become much harder to judge - in the degenerate case of a two-person company, "two dev's bullshitting" and "board oversight and approval" are exactly the same thing...
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
lifeformed 13y ago
The "rogue employee" is actually one of the cofounders. When people caught him, he lied about it and said it only ran for two days and only got 2BTC. Once people dug deeper, he admitted that it actually went on for 14 days and was for 30BTC. He's making it seem like no big deal and treating it as a joke. He's talking down to anyone who says otherwise.

I smell bullshit. Sounds like the company tried it, got caught, and blamed it on a (fictitious?) rogue employee.

by wilfra 13y ago

I smell bullshit. Sounds like the company tried it, got caught, and blamed it on a (fictitious?) rogue employee.

d23 13y ago

> In just a couple of weeks, he netted close to BTC30, or about $3,700. You honestly think the company would risk something like that for such a small amount of money?

wilfra 13y ago
I think they acknowledged they were willing to risk it by considering it in the first place.
- modarts 13y ago
  That's what I found to be strange too. Why was it ever considered?
  - Daniel_Newby 13y ago
    Customers with a low cost of electricity and a hot GPU could have used it to offset the cost of their subscription. They would not have needed to learn anything about Bitcoin or manage their own financial account.
    - bigiain 13y ago
      Hmmm, I wonder if you could somehow plot bitcoin mining rates against location and temperature/climate? I wonder if there are people who selectively turn on their mining boxen to use as room heaters, effectively getting the computation (and bitcoins) "for free" since they'd be consuming the power for heating anyway?
      - skarmklart 13y ago
        Yes, it's not unheard of.
      - modarts 13y ago
        Thoughts like this are why I love this site.
  - bigiain 13y ago
    "the company considered" has a quite wide range of possible interpretations. It could mean anything from "a few developers bullshitted about it in the lunch room", through to "the board oversaw prototype development and approved a pilot deployment to measure public response" - which are _clearly_ very different scenarios. Unfortunately, while it's easy to distinguish those two meanings at a large company, as you try to distinguish the intent at smaller and smaller companies, the differences become much harder to judge - in the degenerate case of a two-person company, "two dev's bullshitting" and "board oversight and approval" are exactly the same thing...
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

lifeformed 13y ago

The "rogue employee" is actually one of the cofounders. When people caught him, he lied about it and said it only ran for two days and only got 2BTC. Once people dug deeper, he admitted that it actually went on for 14 days and was for 30BTC. He's making it seem like no big deal and treating it as a joke. He's talking down to anyone who says otherwise.