Quote from: Etlase2 on November 07, 2013, 08:21:19 AM

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 07, 2013, 08:12:17 AM

The point of CPU-only is the millions mass your coin can gain in the market since anyone can download and get some coin. Mass leads to network effects, which leads to competing against Bitcoin effectively, given Bitcoin only has 350,000 users.

This is not a well-thought argument. A CPU coin is likely to be dominated by expensive CPUs and/or CPU farms that are available for time purchase. Those with low-end CPUs will be forced to upgrade to remain relevant, but the simpler and perhaps more financially sound option is to purchase the currency in lieu of mining it. This is the *exact same* scenario with GPUs. And it also makes sense economically because if everyone is a miner, no one is demanding to trade fiat for it, and all value must enter the coin via burning electricity.

I guess you haven't read this:

Quote from: AnonyMint on November 06, 2013, 05:02:47 AM

1. With CPU-only mining, I expect difficulty to exceed any reasonable
level that can be returned on investment, because millions of people will
do it because they easily can (download and click) and they won't correlate
to their insignificant increase in electric bill nor the cost of the PC they
already own applied to their part-time, hobbyist mining.

Meaning there won't be sufficient return for serious miners after the initial launch period. Only the masses will bother once the masses are the majority of miners. Wink

That was my most clever insight.

Call this the "lottery effect". People play the lottery even though it is a horrible return-on-investment.