Apart from your share of the costs of the associated externalities of using large amounts of electricity, of course.
Does it use that much more than just having a computer switched on normally?
ok. So now I just leave my computer on 24/7 for about 6 months and I'll have about £20 worth of bitcoin. Luckily I don't pay electric so can't see how I stand to lose anything.
I personally switch computers off but in this case it would be doing something - making (imaginary) money
It would be making money by using energy. You might not be paying directly for that energy but that doesn't make it free.
I'm struggling to see the difference between me and, say, microsoft or google.
So it's a cost/benefit analysis. How much are you giving up for the sake of that £20 over several months?
True but don't all businesses use energy to make money? I'm struggling to see the difference between me and, say, microsoft or google.
in the sense that we would all be using energy to make money. The point being that they do it on a vast scale unlike little me.
They are finite, but infinitely divisible.
If bitcoin are finite then surely we are going to reach a point where mining becomes pointless... Or have I missed something (i.e. that they are somehow destroyed when spent...)
Whole argument is moot anyway coz I can't figure out what's going on. Up to 102 000 blocks. Don't know whether it's started mining or not or how to start it if it hasn't.
The 'mining' bit always struck me as a huge waste. I understand that you have to give a new currency credibility by not magicking it up out of thin air, but now that enough are in circulation, perhaps it would be an idea to stop getting all these processors churning out useless hashes and doing something useful instead!