Bitcoin Forum

http://www.bitcoinblogger.com/2011/05/google-could-be-destroyed-javascript.html

Discuss.

There is a new and revolutionary breakthrough bitcoin application that could potentially destroy Google. Yes, that's correct, this technology could completely annihilate Google. Google's business mostly relies on its AdSense program which allows website owners the ability to place ads in their webpages to earn money. However, with 100% Javascript bitcoin miners website owners no longer have to place ads in their website to make money.

JS Miners can be placed into webpages and earn income for the website owner. The advantages for the end-user is that ads will no longer annoy users. NO MORE ADS! The longer a user spends time on a web page the more money the bitcoin miner will earn for the website operator. Website owners are now encouraged to have quality content so users stay and read longer. This means that quality is king and if a user leaves a website immediately then that website is rewarded less. (I could see this potentially saving the newspaper industry.)

JS Miners also removes Google's overhead and more money could potentially be awarded to the website owner. JS miners can also perform micro transactions easier than Google so all mining can be compensated an no amount of money is lost. If a computer mines .000001 bitcoins then this amount is recorded and taken into account.

Yes, it is possible these JS Miners can utilize CPU resources and slow down the computer, but these settings can be adjusted to allow a good user experience. This bitcoin revolution is just beginning...

Not until they utilize GPUs (and that seems to be some distance in the future). Now, a Flash miner....

In short no.

1. The bitcoin JS miner makes very little money compared to ads.  

2. There is no incentive to remove ads just because there is a JavaScript miner on a site.  If the miner ever makes sense (maybe with WebCL), sites will just do both.

it's a very clever idea, and i'd love nothing more than to see google and other ad-based corporate monoliths restrained. (i personally think they're much greater concerns for privacy and liberty than inflation in fiat currencies, practically speaking.)

but being able to run a javascript miner, even if you get around all the other potential problems (simple technological ones, the opportunities for cheating on unsecured networks, etc.), posting a javascript miner doesn't prevent or 'replace' ads, does it? nothing stops a website from using miners in addition to ads, but why would running one stop the other?

Some numbers:

Using http://bitp.it/, my laptop (not a top-of-the-line machine now, but it was a few years ago) is trying ~5,000 hashes per second. Blockexplorer tells me it'll take 1048471149936089 hashes to win. A win would be 50 BTC, which at current exchange rates is about USD 300. So each second of processing time gets me 5000 * 300 / 1048471149936089 = 0.00000000143 USD. Let's say I have a thousand people visiting my site 24/7 for a year.

0.00000000143 dollars per second * 1000 people * 31557600 seconds per year ~= $45

That's actually higher than I thought it would be. Note that this assumes the exchange rate and difficulty don't change, which they will.

Then you would need a confirmation like, 'this site wants to generate coins for address xxxxx. Are you sure?'.

GPU Accelerated Flash?

so, http://bitp.it/ allows you to make mining using the CPU power of the user who visits your web site?
this use of CPU from the user is of the 100%? it slow down the computer?

Ok, the blog article I wrote was a little...sensational.  Oh well, I'm just a blogger creating controversy.

To answer your question what if staying on the website made more money than to redirect users through the click?  Putting in ads could redirect users which would mine less for the website...shrug.

Yes, no different from the way visiting any web site could slow down your computer, for example with a lot of flash ads.

Web site owners who do this (either with a miner or lots of flash ads) better be giving their users a lot of value or people will avoid visiting the site, although it's true that the miner is less obtrusive visually at least.

but what about when the mining day are over....  ::)

While I also dislike the Adwords monopoly I would clearly seek out any measure available to block scripts that slow down my computer, produce heat (= wearing my hardware), and increase my electricity costs.

the ming days are over...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3030/3061488412_3334d6fcc4_z.jpg?zz=1
 :)

When i'm gpu mining my hast rate drops in half when i open a youtube video. So Flash is gpu accelerated on windows at least

Also WebGL through Javascript uses the GPU

There are three serious problems with this approach:

1. CPU mining leads to very little earnings, even when you have thousands of visitors.
2. It may piss off users far more than ads. "Why is my computer so slow when I visit your site?".
3. Google will label/ban sites using this as malicious/malware.

NoScript will be the new adblock :)

errr, it also assumes that you have at least 1,000 people on your site that aren't blocking JS at all times. Having 1000 site visitors is not the same as always having at least 1000 simultaneous visitors. So you are talking about having upwards of 150k users per day to make $45/year. If you have a consistent 150k users per day you can monetize your content far beyond $4 a month.

With the emergence of the new APU's that feature GPU cores might be something to think about for the future. They might provide enough power to start making some real change even at current exchange rates.

I currently do JS mining... but  I do viral CPA marketing using content blockers.. the user is on my money page for 30 seconds to a minute usually.  Most my money is made from the offers they complete, so the JS miner is just for that extra kick.  I'm averaging over 300users online every minute.  To lazy to do the math but it does create shares and does work with big numbers as a extra source of income.

I would never put it on a "legit" site though.

How many MHashes per second does that represent, roughly?

Would like to know as well.

It doesn't necessarily replaces ads, but  it can compete with them under some circumstances, each approach to passive money making has it's pros and cons.

I know this is a very old thread, but since then, concepts like sidechaining, the Lightning net, etc., have been developed since 2011.

If blockchain tech takes over more, Google will die because Google is centralized and blockchain tech is decentralized.

Since Google processes about 50k transactions per second (~a trillion / year) in its ad tracking campaign (far more than all the major credit cards combined), there's no way that with current tech this could be done on the Bitcoin mainchain. Hence, sidechaining would be necessary.

This is one hell of a grave dig. Wouldn't a pool be responsible for processing those transactions for work? I don't see how that would impact the blockchain.