Topic: Websites powered by bitcoin mining - page 2. (Read 1685 times)

Overall the loss is about 5% to 20% if the price doesn't go up. And with that you get the ability to have constant donations. You might not want to mine for them but I would. For example in my case I'm not going to send them any bitcoin. But I would buy a cheap miner and point it at their site. If I'm the only one then yeah it wouldn't work but I would bet that if they have a mining address up at the top of their site with a hash rate clock I would bet it would get quite a few miners.

Mining Bitcoin to fund a website is eh if anything, a website should be able to find a way to break even and not end up as a money sink. In WikiLeaks' case they break even off of donations and being a powerful site browsed by a number of people.

There is no point hosting something that doesn't have the ability to break even, and even then a website is relatively cheap to run a majority of the time.

no..
if someone invested 2.5btc.. after 200 months they would earn 0.25btc total (based on a 2.5% difficulty change)

however fiat valuation needs to be a consideration.. say someone didnt buy bitcoin. but spend $1600 as bitcoin
they would in 200 months get 0.25btc.. but.. the dollar value of 0.25 is hoped to be 80%-95% of their initial $1600

however. it still does not dismiss my point. why spend 2.5btc to earn 0.25 when you can slowly give them 2.5btc which after a 200 month period is a LARGER donation than $1600.
EG if people hope 0.25=$1600 in 200 months, then 2.5btc=$16,000 in 200 months by default.. right.
so why spend 2.5btc to mine.. for the HOPE of giving wikileaks $1600.. where as just handing them 2.5 GUARANTEE's them $1600 and the potential (thanks to deflation) of ALOT more

I don't agree with you that people are losing 90% of money investing in mining. They are probably losing between 5% and 20% and at that margin it makes sense.

Also remember this doesn't have to be bitcoin mining it could be litecoin or whatever.

https://www.quora.com/Is-anyone-making-money-in-bitcoin-mining-anymore

Thanks I try. It seems to me that you might have failed at bitcoin mining and you are letting it get to you. Perhaps you can use your equipment here on this, and that way you could cross it off as a success overall.

And yes on the subject of bitcoin mining I made a small amount buying equipment on ebay and mining till the price went up and then selling it. However, I did not make money on CEXIO when that first came out. I did lose money on that mining. But the equipment yes I made a bit.

But anyway your overestimating the loss, most people that mine bitcoin are losing like 5-20% and that's at current bitcoin rates but if the price goes up they would make money. Who cares if you lose 5% on a donation if you have all the benefits that would come in using it.

i made money when i mined too.. but bitmain and other chinese miners that get free rigs and cheap/free electric, which has changed that dynamic.

anyway
I admire your persistence. Usually when people are wrong then just quit. But frankly let's face it if you think people are going to spend $200 to give $20 and burn $180.. your crazy

need i forget that having a $200 rig that produces 10% returns hasnt equated for the electric for them 200 months, meaning costs are higher then $200 but donation is effectively nothing

i understand your idea at concept level. i understand at the altruistic level. but at a practical real world level. the negatives dont outweigh the positives

Your assurances aren't very convincing.


Probably a lot less than you do.  I've been very impressed by your contributions so far.

I assure you I'm not. By the way beside trolling these forms all day do you do anything in Bitcoin worthwhile?

Are you familiar with the concept of projection?


I'm not going to say that's impossible, but given how much difficulty you are having grasping the concept of opportunity cost, I suspect that you are probably mistaken about that.

More specifically, I suspect that if you had just bought bitcoins with the money that you spent on mining then you would have made quite a bit more money than you made from mining.  By choosing to mine instead, you effectively lost those additional profits you could have had.

Haha I admire your persistence. Usually when people are wrong then just quit. But frankly I think you can see the benefits now even if you don't personally want to participate. Because let's face it if you think people are going to build their own "auto money sender" your crazy. Also for people like you it's fine you can just send your donation. I'm not saying people can't also donate I'm just saying this can be another option for people who want to fund something and at the same time be able to control that donation. And frankly all of your points rely on 1 fact that mining will always produce a loss but I'm sorry to tell you guys actually i made money mining when i did it. It wasn't much but I made a bit. And in that situation if it happens not only are you donating more then just the cost but also you have all the other benefits as well.

or you make a bot and send $1each month for the next 200months.giving them a total of $200 and you get to decide when to stop paying them
rather then mining and wikileaks only gets $1 month-one, $0.95c month-two, $0.90c month-three.. and so on until after 200months wikileaks has only got $20 total, yep i said that right, $20.....(2.5% fortnightly difficulty adjustment(rounded to 5% a month)


though they could have addresses per "story", which i see no problem with.. its not about why you pay them thats the issue.. its HOW they are funded.
again mining is just burning money, you might aswell just pay direct

again pay them direct. but as you highlighted only pay them in stages or adhok depending on which stories you found relevant

Right in that scenario I'm with you. However, think about it like this instead. Let's say you buy a simple miner for 200 bucks off ebay and you point it at wikileaks. Then you find out they are doing something wrong that you don't like. You turn off your miner. Or think about it like this maybe they have many different mining addresses and you chose to mine on the stories that you think are the most important. And give them your vote on what they need to work on. This way for the next 5 years you can use your power and your skill to help power something you believe in and if at any time you feel that it's not going the right way you move your mining power to where it matters. And then imagine your example you send them 300 bucks and it's gone they decide to close up shop and leave? They decide that they are going to change their mission and only cover stories that relate to whatever is funny? Your money is gone you have no say... What do you choose?

Also consider how many people have mining equipment that isn't "profitable" anymore in regards to making money but still would be great for charity?

but spending money, knowing that wikileaks is receiving less then you spent, is foolish. you might as well hand them funds directly.

if i had lets say $15 and i said i wanted to dedicate this $15 towards a charity. but here is the twist, i use that $15 to pay for electric so some dude can work in a sweatshop, knowing what that dude does only earns $5 for the charity.. i would slap myself for literally burning $10

Right in that scenario I'm with you. However, think about it like this instead. Let's say you buy a simple miner for 200 bucks off ebay and you point it at wikileaks. Then you find out they are doing something wrong that you don't like. You turn off your miner. Or think about it like this maybe they have many different mining addresses and you chose to mine on the stories that you think are the most important. And give them your vote on what they need to work on. This way for the next 5 years you can use your power and your skill to help power something you believe in and if at any time you feel that it's not going the right way you move your mining power to where it matters. And then imagine your example you send them 300 bucks and it's gone they decide to close up shop and leave? They decide that they are going to change their mission and only cover stories that relate to whatever is funny? Your money is gone you have no say... What do you choose?

Also consider how many people have mining equipment that isn't "profitable" anymore in regards to making money but still would be great for charity?

So, you have $1600, and you have a choice.  You can send the charity or website $1600, or you can buy a bitcoin miner and mine $1000 worth of bitcoin for the website.

Wouldn't it be better to just give them the $1600 directly right away?  Rather than making them wait to receive only $1000 in small increments over a period of a few years?

I agree with you mining isn't profitable. But that's not the point it doesn't need to be. You see for the first time mining could be used to power the internet rather then just mining for profit like these companies don't do anyway. Just think rather then these stupid companies in china mining for nothing why not mine for something.

That's true but in this case it doesn't matter if we break even because the point is to power a website, not break even. If people combined their mining power, even with old devices, it would still help out the cause of the website. Even if you didn't break even in the process. I mean think about it you donate your time and money to charity your not going to get that time back. And your not going to break even. Your helping out a cause. And like I said before the problem with just giving them money is that they are just going to cash out. If the money was more consistent they could pay their employees with it or pay for hosting or whatever.

Want to tell you about how unprofitable mining these days, but another member already explained it very well.

So, how about you donate some bitcoin to those organizations instead since donate mined bitcoin just waste time and even more money.
Also, you can donate regularly so they also can have stable income to run their service/website.

mining is not profitable having 2.5btc to buy a rig does not guarantee 2.5btc after any time mining.

even at 0 electric costs, its still $1600 for a mining rig. which sets you back by that amount and are left needing to get $1600 again just to break even
unless your bitmain OR able to get the $1600 rig for $320 to compete against bitmain.. forget it.

bitmain is doing good because the production cost of their antpool mining rigs is 0, their electric is also 0

lets explain
they get paid by customers at $1600 to give that person a rig.
bitmain can either decide to:
make 5 rigs, hand 1 to the customer and keep 4 for themselves, to be 4x ahead of customer by mining. using proceeds of mining on electric/labour
or
make 3 rigs, hand 1 to the customer and keep 2 and use the other $640 to pay electric and labour for other projects
or
make 2 rigs, hand 1 to the customer and keep 1 and use the other $320 to pay electric and buy one bitcoin to hoard
or
make 1 rig, hand 1 to the customer and buy 2 bitcoin to hoard

either way, bitmain wins by a factor of 4. all because bitmains retail price $1600 is 5x more then their costs.

note:
if you are going to use a mining earnings calculator to show how much return on 12 months. make sure the calculator is not just showing todays earnings and then multiplying that by a month and then by a year.(95% of calculators do this dump calculations)
make sure it calculates in the fortnightly loss of income due to difficulty. and a daily loss of income scale due to competition(hash power competing)

in short and to help with your idea
it doesnt matter how cheap your electric is, unless you can get a rig at discount. you can only "hope" to break even.
its far cheaper/easier to just give wikileaks 2.5btc now, instead of buying a rig using that 2.5btc, and left hoping one day they get 2.5btc

I was just thinking that some websites should be powered by bitcoin mining. Like wikileaks for example. Because having bitcoin donations is inconsistent and the people who get those donations are just going to exchange them as soon as they can for regular money. But if the site was powered by bitcoin mining then it would give them a constant consistent income stream witch they are probably more likely to find something to do with rather then just exchange.

I was thinking of setting up a bitcoin mining account and locking the payment address to the wikileaks donation address. And then they could put up even a metric on their site showing the mining power pointed at them. It would be a way to power what they are doing and also show the faith people have in websites by the amount of power pointed at them.

I was wondering if anyone had any old mining equipment they would be willing use as a test for this?

So, you have $1600, and you have a choice.  You can send the charity or website $1600, or you can buy a bitcoin miner and mine $1000 worth of bitcoin for the website.

"Wouldn't it be better to just give them the $1600 directly right away?  Rather than making them wait to receive only $1000 in small increments over a period of a few years?"

Right in that scenario I'm with you. However, think about it like this instead. Let's say you buy a simple miner for 200 bucks off ebay and you point it at wikileaks. Then you find out they are doing something wrong that you don't like. You turn off your miner. Or think about it like this maybe they have many different mining addresses and you chose to mine on the stories that you think are the most important. And give them your vote on what they need to work on. This way for the next 5 years you can use your power and your skill to help power something you believe in and if at any time you feel that it's not going the right way you move your mining power to where it matters. And then imagine your example you send them 300 bucks and it's gone they decide to close up shop and leave? They decide that they are going to change their mission and only cover stories that relate to whatever is funny? Your money is gone you have no say... What do you choose?

Also consider how many people have mining equipment that isn't "profitable" anymore in regards to making money but still would be great for charity?