Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 04:06:07 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 [1230] 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1803954 times)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 06:19:28 AM
 #24581

There is nowhere else for the heat to go.

Aren't you forgetting that the efficiency of a thermodynamic process is proportional the ratio of the differences in temperature and the ambient.

For someone who trumpets regularly about his superior intelligence and his breaking insights into fields from physics to economics, you sure get a lot of the basics wrong.  If a mining device uses X joules of electrical energy to perform Y hashes, those X joules get converted into an equal amount of heat.  This is basic conservation of energy.

Didn't I make it clear from my upthread posts that I was talking about fact that heat has to be transferred to the environment over spacetime, and the assumption of the integral of transfer being contained with the duty cycle of the effective use of the heat may not be perfectly aligned. If I am not mistaken the differential temperature is one of the metrics on the calculation of the spacetime performance characteristics of a thermal exchange.

Smooth retorted that for example the miner could be turned off before the use of the hair dyer ceased, but that is not a fungible use case of the normal usage of a hair dyer where I don't need to inform my hair dyer how many minutes I will be using it.

No what I suggested was that if that the typical use time of a hair dryer were say 10 minutes, it could be designed to turn off the mining chip after 9 minutes (or a smarter one -- not hard to imagine if it has a mining chip in it --  may learn it's owner's specific usage pattern). That likely reduces the (already small) residual heat to a bare minimum (only in those cases where the user turns it off early, for example if the phone rings).

Toasters and hair driers might be dumb uses for it anyway, though it depends how low the cost of the chip can be driven down. Room heaters, water heaters, etc. are much better.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480824367
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480824367

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480824367
Reply with quote  #2

1480824367
Report to moderator
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 06:29:01 AM
 #24582

Room heaters, water heaters, etc. are much better.

In what way if any is my upthread argument against these being a wide-scale target market not correct?

Or are you still just arguing about (I assert irrelevant) energy efficiency without respect to (I assert relevant) overall efficiency?

Edit: I wasn't trying to make it appear you erred on the points about energy efficiency. I am concerned with what is relevant and didn't think I was attempting to make it appear you made an error. I am urging you to raise the debate to relevant factors because I am most interested in a conclusion so I can move on.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 06:34:27 AM
 #24583

His question was not asking about energy efficiency, but rather what is the holistic point of it all. And he is correct that the energy efficiency is scam. The real goal is enslavement of the developing world by loaning a smartphone in exchange for unnoticed electricity usage.

His question was exactly efficiency. I answered both with respect to energy efficiency (much better than the best ASICs as currently deployed, given effectively free electricity) and overall efficiency (likely also, since the chips will likely be very cheap). If I recall correctly I also said I didn't think it was a particularly good idea, regardless of efficiency.

He didn't ask about Larry Summers, etc. That's fair game for you be interested in talking about, but not what he asked.

Is it possible for a toaster/phone + mining chip to be as/more efficient than the best ASIC's on the market, and if it is not, how can this be a cost-efficient way to mine?

Cropping what he wrote doesn't help you. It is clear to me he was asking what the overall economic point is, and he introduced energy efficiency as one of the aspects that doesn't give him a holistic understanding. If you then argue that efficiency is improved in irrelevant and insignificant markets, you create holistic myopia instead of understanding.

The markets are not insignificant. The water heater market is approximately 100 million units per year. The largest markets are currently Brazil and China, I guess due to rapid urbanization and development. Of current deliveries, electric-powered units are a large share, possibly >50% (Brazil appears to lack gas distribution or has some other reason to favor electric, because almost all of the market there is electric.)

I don't really understand what notion of "total efficiency" you are using other than what it is people in the market choose to buy. People seem to want to buy electric heating devices. There is little question that eventually these electric heating applications will migrate to some sort of mining-integrated solution, assuming mining continues to be a thing. I don't know if that really has anything to do with how 21 plans to make money. It doesn't seem like a terribly good business in terms of sustainable margins, even if it will eventually happen regardless.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:02:36 AM
 #24584

The markets are not insignificant. The water heater market is approximately 100 million units per year. The largest markets are currently Brazil and China, I guess due to rapid urbanization and development. Of current deliveries, electric-powered units are a large share, possibly >50% (Brazil appears to lack gas distribution or has some other reason to favor electric, because almost all of the market there is electric.)

You mean potential market. But you need to quantify what % of that market can be realistically captured.

I don't really understand what notion of "total efficiency" you are using other than what it is people in the market choose to buy. People seem to want to buy electric heating devices. There is little question that eventually these electric heating applications will migrate to some sort of mining-integrated solution, assuming mining continues to be a thing.

You don't agree that some (probably most) people in the market for a water heater don't have incentive for the tsuris of figuring out all the details with getting a mining device running, connected to the internet, integrate into their tax return, operational issues with wallets, etc.?

Hey I am at the hardware store and my gf is begging me to hurry up because we need to get to her mother's birthday by 2pm. I don't have time for this Bitcoin complication. Sell me a water heater please.

Naive non-marketers think "I want a water heater", "mining device makes heat free", "thus I want water heater + mining device". This is myopic because it doesn't factor in that the + operator is not a zero cost operation in the marketing context. Upsells are lossy especially if only 0.1% of the population is in the market for your upsell.

But there was an easier way to refute this point that had escaped both of us (only because I was too sleepy last night when I signed off).

A water heater requires 4000W of power (in order to provide rapid heatup function that most consumers demand). I can't find a BTC miner with that wattage consumption for less than perhaps $20,000. I just briefly checked and only saw a 1250W one for $10,200.

Who is going to pay $10,000+ (or even $1000) extra for a water heater?

The entire energy efficiency deal is a ruse and coverup for the real goal which is to shoehorn mining into smartphones for a market segment that has no knowledge nor use for it.

If excess heat were a viable business model, the miners would have long ago adopted it as major movement. It doesn't take $116 million in capital to figure out how to retrofit mining hardware onto an insulated water tank.

This is yet another example of how the TPTB are top-down misallocating resources (because the free market always does it better) and destroying the global economy into their NWO death paradigm.

hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:12:02 AM
 #24585

i see this as all positive:

"We are now going to use our name, reputation and global index provider stature to provide bitcoin values that the rest of the market can look to," says Tom Farley, who serves as president of NYSE, the venerable financial institution that has come to symbolize Wall Street and capitalism more broadly."

"New technology does not intimidate us, it excites us," Farley says, effectively summing up the new mindset of NYSE. Bitcoin in particular excited him, both because of the interest in the currency and the blockchain technology behind it, which serves as a transaction database. "It was that curiosity and also... let's not wait for this to fully evolve; let's get a seat early on and see how this matures."

http://mashable.com/2015/05/19/new-york-stock-exchange-bitcoin/

I stop reading @"NYSE, the venerable institution..." Roll Eyes

Seriously why do bitcoiners keeps on sucking up them masters arses?! Bitcoin is not here to save wall street's minions. Its here to bypass them.

PS: i dont want bitcoin to be linked in any sort with their reputation

but why would you want to deny them their rightful participation in a new form of money they might actually believe in?  afaict, they aren't trying to change anything about Bitcoin; they just want in.  that can be beneficial for the space.


meh: "fool me once, shame on you.. fool me twice.. shame on me"

its pretty dull to think they'll change or that their "motivations" towards Bitcoin are "humble" in any sort.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:18:10 AM
 #24586

You don't agree that some (probably most) people in the market for a water heater don't have incentive for the tsuris of figuring out all the details with getting a mining device running, connected to the internet, etc.?

I don't know. Depends how the device is designed. If it simply mines for the manufacturer and subsidizes the cost of the purchase, and if configuration is simple or nonexistent (perhaps a built-in cellular data chip with prepaid access), then I can see that working absolutely, and even possibly driving non-mining heaters off the market altogether. Many purchases are made without thinking past the up front cost.

Quote
I can't find a BTC miner with that wattage consumption for less than perhaps $20,000. I just briefly checked and only saw a 1250W one for $10,200.

I don't believe that is remotely applicable because you are paying for cutting edge power efficiency, for the case where that matters (high density deployments in data centers and mining farms), not the case where power is effectively free. If you can find them, you can buy older, less power-efficient miners for next to nothing. Underclock a bit so they run quietly and they make great room heaters!

It's also not a mass market product where chip prices can be driven down enormously. (How many microprocessors/microcontrollers would you imagine people own without even being aware of it? The number is quite high.)

Also, the mining component doesn't have to provide all the heat output, only some of it.
sickpig
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:18:22 AM
 #24587

If I recall correctly, the Bitcoin dev team was really excited about Zerocoin, until they saw that computational overhead which rightfully scared them away.

Now a zerocoin sidechain that is merged mined with Bitcoin and only lives off of it's own transaction fees, would enable people to fully clean any coin they have for a modest fee.

I vaguely remember the problem you mentioned and the shared secret needed in the bootstrapping step as the main causes why zerocoin wasn't merged, but I could be wrong.

Now both of them are solved in zerocash, though a merge now is highly improbable for economical, political and technical reasons.


Bitcoin is a participatory system which ought to respect the right of self determinism of all of its users - Gregory Maxwell.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:30:59 AM
 #24588

You don't agree that some (probably most) people in the market for a water heater don't have incentive for the tsuris of figuring out all the details with getting a mining device running, connected to the internet, etc.?

I don't know. Depends how the device is designed. If it simply mines for the manufacturer and subsidizes the cost of the purchase, and if configuration is simple or nonexistent (perhaps a built-in cellular data chip with prepaid access), then I can see that working absolutely, and even possibly driving non-mining heaters off the market altogether. Many purchases are made without thinking past the up front cost.

Cellular providers are not fungible every where. You are consistently attempting to erase the non-fungible characteristics in your analysis.

Quote
I can't find a BTC miner with that wattage consumption for less than perhaps $20,000. I just briefly checked and only saw a 1250W one for $10,200.

I don't believe that is remotely applicable because you are paying for cutting edge power efficiency, for the case where that matters (high density deployments in data centers and mining farms), not the case where power is effectively free. If you can find them, you can buy older, less power-efficient miners for next to nothing.

Can you show me any example? If we choose 10X less efficient technology, thus 10X less Bitcoins for the same wattage, thus my maximum of $50 (probably less) water portion of the electric bills gets subsidized by $5 per month. And for what additional cost and tsuris?

Work some specific numbers and I challenge you to find it to be viable. Is all the cost of BTC miners in the exclusivity (limited supply) of the latest (Intellectual Property) designs and virtually no hardware fabrication cost at all? Surely more firms would have entered to drive down prices in that case.

I do understand that if you produce a dedicated chip instead of ASIC, then costs decline significantly with volume. But efficiency also declines with age of the design.

If you don't replace your miner every 18 months, then you subsidy declines by half according to Moore's law. Are Bitcoin miners following Moore's law.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:48:39 AM
 #24589

Apparently space heating is 63% of electricity costs in cold climates compared to 17% for water heating:

https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/products/categories/water-heaters/13735

Water heating cost can in many cases be reduced by 90% with a solar water heater assuming especially so in warmer climates. This is a more permanent option than Bitcoin mining, doesn't require periodic upgrading, doesn't require tax reporting.

Consider also the losses due to taxes on minted coins.

With space heating, we don't need 21 Inc. Anyone in the market for space heating with Bitcoin mining, can go buy a used miner on ebay now. Thus if that was a big mass movement market, why hasn't it happened already?

Either the economics or the market awareness are not conducive. Can 21 Inc do something to change that?

lunarboy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 544



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:50:10 AM
 #24590

UBS pays $545m to settle foreign exchange probe BBC - UBS FINE

Quote
US and UK authorities are expected to hand out penalties to major banks totalling about $5bn related to the foreign exchange investigation.

Just remind me again, what's the yearly quantity of money that got manipulated in the global Forex markets???
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 07:52:57 AM
 #24591

UBS pays $545m to settle foreign exchange probe BBC - UBS FINE

Quote
US and UK authorities are expected to hand out penalties to major banks totalling about $5bn related to the foreign exchange investigation.

Just remind me again, what's the yearly quantity of money that got manipulated in the global Forex markets???

Let's slap each other's wrist while we are copulating under the table with our other hands. But really can't you see we are smilingsneering (it so vigorous ya) and thus reforming.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:01:18 AM
 #24592

If I recall correctly, the Bitcoin dev team was really excited about Zerocoin, until they saw that computational overhead which rightfully scared them away.

Now a zerocoin sidechain that is merged mined with Bitcoin and only lives off of it's own transaction fees, would enable people to fully clean any coin they have for a modest fee.

I vaguely remember the problem you mentioned and the shared secret needed in the bootstrapping step as the main causes why zerocoin wasn't merged, but I could be wrong.

Now both of them are solved in zerocash, though a merge now is highly improbable for economical, political and technical reasons.

You are confusing the coin and the cash.  Zerocoin had severe scaling issues but less of a threat of unknown money supply (coins can be minted if key compromised but all coins coming out the accumulator are countable). Zerocash reduced scaling issues (but arguably not enough to scale) but added an uncountable money supply along with greater anonymity of every aspect of the transaction including the payment amounts.

Afaik, there was an attempt to fix the process of selecting the master key in Zerocash which is argued to be secure, but afaik there are still detractors who question if that process is secure. Bottom line is you can't count the money supply in Zerocash thus you can not prove whether it was secure or not in the real world.

Also I was worried about how reverted transactions would work in Zerocash with orphaned chains if there was attempt to avoid selfish mining using my math to merge blockchains and pay proportion coinbase (minted coins on) all orphaned chains.

Have there been developments since that?

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:05:28 AM
 #24593

With space heating, we don't need 21 Inc. Anyone in the market for space heating with Bitcoin mining, can go buy a used miner on ebay now. Thus if that was a big mass movement market, why hasn't it happened already?

It has. Poke around the mining forums and you see people mentioning constantly that keeping their home warm is part of the value proposition of mining for them.

21 apparently wants to scale out appliance and device mining to the mass market. That hasn't happened yet because no one has done it yet. The mass market isn't interested in (perhaps less than optimally efficient) mining rigs as heating units, but they'll be happy with an integrated plug-in unit that costs them less because it mines for the manufacturer.

Also, there no real tax burden to the manufacturer, mining revenue is taxed essentially the same as product or service revenue, especially if converted to fiat right away. That might well be part of the value-add to a subsidized-product model of mining.




Bagatell
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 719



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:09:01 AM
 #24594

UBS pays $545m to settle foreign exchange probe BBC - UBS FINE

Quote
US and UK authorities are expected to hand out penalties to major banks totalling about $5bn related to the foreign exchange investigation.

Just remind me again, what's the yearly quantity of money that got manipulated in the global Forex markets???


"According to the Bank for International Settlements,[4] the preliminary global results from the 2013 Triennial Central Bank Survey of Foreign Exchange and OTC Derivatives Markets Activity show that trading in foreign exchange markets averaged $5.3 trillion per day in April 2013."
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:13:11 AM
 #24595

With space heating, we don't need 21 Inc. Anyone in the market for space heating with Bitcoin mining, can go buy a used miner on ebay now. Thus if that was a big mass movement market, why hasn't it happened already?

It has. Poke around the mining forums and you see people mentioning constantly that keeping their home warm is part of the value proposition of mining for them.

I know that. No mass movement.

21 apparently wants to scale out appliance and device mining to the mass market. That hasn't happened because no one has done it yet. The mass market isn't interested in (perhaps less than optimally efficient) mining rigs as heating units, but they'll be happy with an integrated plug-in unit that costs them less because it mines for the manufacturer.

So you are asserting that selling space heaters to individuals didn't work because no one made an integrated plug-n-play process? And the retailers of appliances can make it so resolving connectivity and operational issues  Huh

You don't $116 million to launch that over the internet, unless the point is you need to have it in all retailers and with name brand names on the products.

The only really viable market is space heating thus limited to winter months and cold climates. The other appliance markets are not viable because too small of a ROI for the hassle of installation/maintenance and/or have superior replacements.

Also, there no real tax burden to the manufacturer, mining revenue is taxed essentially the same as product or service revenue, especially if converted to fiat right away.

You are saying the manufacturer will sell the device at a lower price (taking all the mined coins) but the consumer will pay the same electric bill, then bother to keep the miner running well  Huh

Any shell games on who pays the utility bill don't resolve the tax culpability (at least in the USA).

Some people will do it for space heating in cold enough climates. Most people won't, at least not a quick ramp up in the West and third world. China would be the largest market I bet, because of their combination of frugal mindset, engineering and math acumen, I think no income tax, authorities can get top-down things done that align with their global Technocracy goals (Smart electric meters, etc), and developing youthful demographics economy. Again these are likely sales to cash and limited network effects.

The other big target market are the smartphones in developing markets, but again the economics are not very compelling.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:24:51 AM
 #24596

One more point. The extent to which space heated mining is developed could be good for altcoins too and thus is not a lockin, because the barriers to entry are low. You have a CPU-hash focused coin, okay turn on your computer and mine to warm your room. Plug-n-play with temperature control can be Kickstarted.

The smartphone target market is the attempted lockin, but I think it not very economically compelling on a wide scale in terms of BTC micropayments. Might work a bit on subsidizing smartphone adoption without the micropayments network efforts. That isn't really a big threat of lockin then.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:29:08 AM
 #24597

21 apparently wants to scale out appliance and device mining to the mass market. That hasn't happened because no one has done it yet. The mass market isn't interested in (perhaps less than optimally efficient) mining rigs as heating units, but they'll be happy with an integrated plug-in unit that costs them less because it mines for the manufacturer.

So you are asserting that selling space heaters to individuals didn't work because no one made an integrated plug-n-play process? And the retailers of appliances can make it so resolving connectivity and operational issues  Huh

I'm asserting that no one has tried to sell Bitcoin miners as space heaters because it's been too small and too new of a market and no one has developed the technology for embeddable mining. Selling products at consumer price points is very different from selling mining rigs to be used in big farms and data centers.

Quote
You don't $116 million to launch that over the internet, unless the point is you need to have it in all retailers and with name brand names on the products.

Meh, there is a lot of VC money flying around these days, probable an indirect consequence of QE. So you might be surprised at the crap business plans that get funded. But I would guess yes, their appliances may show up with brand names in retailers at some point. They aren't really even launched yet, the only thing they've done at this point is recently reveled some of their plans/technology.

Quote
Also, there no real tax burden to the manufacturer, mining revenue is taxed essentially the same as product or service revenue, especially if converted to fiat right away.

You are saying the manufacturer will sell the device at a lower price (taking all the mined coins) but the consumer will pay the same electric bill, then bother to keep the miner running well  Huh

I guess it won't require effort to keep it running (or the product will likely fail, which is very possible).

Quote
Any shell games on who pays the utility bill don't resolve the tax culpability (at least in the USA).

There's no shell game here. Mining income is taxed the essentially the same as product revenue. If you sell a product for $100 instead of $200 and get $100 worth of mined coins, then you pay tax on $200, just the same as if you had sold the product for $200. If you sell it for $100 instead of $200 and get $200 worth of mined coins, you in fact sold the product for $300 and pay tax on $300 (but have a higher profit margin).

The consumer gets no tax deduction for heating his water/air, in either case.

The barriers to entry aren't incredibly low, for the product itself, but being integrated into products distributed through a supply chain is a reasonably effective form of lock in by bundling. Walmart probably only carries a few lines of space heaters, etc. Altcoins won't have access to the hash rate unless they can convince the manufacturer.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:32:27 AM
 #24598

21 apparently wants to scale out appliance and device mining to the mass market. That hasn't happened because no one has done it yet. The mass market isn't interested in (perhaps less than optimally efficient) mining rigs as heating units, but they'll be happy with an integrated plug-in unit that costs them less because it mines for the manufacturer.

So you are asserting that selling space heaters to individuals didn't work because no one made an integrated plug-n-play process? And the retailers of appliances can make it so resolving connectivity and operational issues  Huh

I'm asserting that no one has tried to sell Bitcoin miners as space heaters because it's been too small and too new of a market and no one has developed the technology for embeddable mining. Selling products at consumer price points is very different from selling mining rigs to be used in big farms and data centers.

Quote
You don't $116 million to launch that over the internet, unless the point is you need to have it in all retailers and with name brand names on the products.

Meh, there is a lot of VC money flying around these days, probable an indirect consequence of QE. So you might be surprised at the crap business plans that get funded. But I would guess yes, their appliances may show up with brand names in retailers at some point. They aren't really even launched yet, the only thing they've done at this point is recently reveled some of their plans/technology.

Quote
Also, there no real tax burden to the manufacturer, mining revenue is taxed essentially the same as product or service revenue, especially if converted to fiat right away.

You are saying the manufacturer will sell the device at a lower price (taking all the mined coins) but the consumer will pay the same electric bill, then bother to keep the miner running well  Huh

I guess it won't require effort to keep it running (or the product will likely fail, which is very possible).

Quote
Any shell games on who pays the utility bill don't resolve the tax culpability (at least in the USA).

There's no shell game here. Mining income is taxed the essentially the same as product revenue. If you sell a product for $100 instead of $200 and get $100 worth of mined coins, then you pay tax on $200, just the same as if you had sold the product for $200. If you sell it for $100 instead of $200 and get $200 worth of mined coins, you in fact sold the product for $300 and pay tax on $300 (but have a higher profit margin).

The consumer gets no tax deduction for heating his water/air, in either case.

The barriers to entry aren't incredibly low, for the product itself, but being integrated into products distributed through a supply chain is a reasonably effective form of lock in by bundling. Walmart probably only carries a few lines of space heaters, etc. Altcoins won't have access to the hash rate unless they can convince the manufacturer.

My implied point was that if the home user is not paying the tax on mined coins, they are not getting (any mined coins and thus not) a discount on their monthly electric bill, thus what incentive do they have to keep the miner running always?

You are saying the manufacturer will sell the device at a lower price (taking all the mined coins) but the consumer will pay the same electric bill, then bother to keep the miner running well  Huh

Any shell games on who pays the utility bill don't resolve the tax culpability (at least in the USA).

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:35:45 AM
 #24599

My point is that if the home user is not paying the tax on mined coins, they are not getting (any mined coins and thus not) a discount on their monthly electric bill, thus what incentive do they have to keep the miner running always?

Warm water or air (or toast, possibly)
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
May 20, 2015, 08:37:46 AM
 #24600

My point is that if the home user is not paying the tax on mined coins, they are not getting (any mined coins and thus not) a discount on their monthly electric bill, thus what incentive do they have to keep the miner running always?

Warm water or air (or toast, possibly)

I thought these were going to be sold very cheaply nearly free since the electricity cost is the major cost.

Otherwise what incentive do I have to buy one.

Thus when it stops working, I don't have a strong incentive to hassle with it. I might get tired of the tsuris and just want a heater that works.

My point is that a discount on the space heater is not very compelling. A discount on the ongoing electric bill more so, but then taxes have to be dealt with.

Pages: « 1 ... 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 [1230] 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 ... 1560 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!