Such as In many cases it makes economic sense to run an electric space heater when it is -40 C or F outside.
How many times have I pointed out that using electricity for heating is not economic. We use carbon based fuels for heating. There is an orders-of-magnitude difference in efficiency. If you are a Physicist and don't know this, I am flabbergast.
You can ignore reality if you wish.
Natural gas is 1/3 the cost of electric heating:
http://homeguides.sfgate.com/comparing-cost-gas-furnace-vs-electric-heater-61395.htmlSo if someone is using electric heating, then it is because the cost is irrelevant to them. Thus mining a CC to recover a small fraction of that cost is ludicrous. Remember the mining farms near hydroelectric power (or free subsidized electricity alleged in China) will eliminate any possibility of getting much income from your residential mining rig.
Edi 1t: Repeating the same erroneous statement over and over again does not make it correct.
Exactly. Come on man, up your game to producing well researched white papers and stop throwing these poorly contemplated theories at me. I find I am often wasting time rebuking these half-baked concepts that you haven't really thought out well.
Don't tell me the current Satoshi proof-of-work is any where near a fair, competitive free market distribution scheme:
Remember ZIRP-pusher Larry Summers (the same guy alleged to have gone to Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union to arrange the transfer of nationalized assets to newly anointed oligarchs), is on the board of 21 Inc.
As an example of the potential power of its pool, 21's mining operations generated approximately 5,700 BTC in 2013 and 69,000 BTC the following year, according to the document.
By the time its chips were to be embedded into Internet of Things (IoT) devices, 21 projected its cost to produce 1 BTC could be as low as $7.45.
So we pay $600 per BTC, and 21 Inc. will pay $8.