So this means the current best USB miner is as good as 14/0.2 = 70 S9s.
lol, mistake here. I of course meant that 70 such USB miners are as good as one S9.
reply
Antminer u1 does 1.6gh/h. Its usb. Slightly changes your calculations right? Also, its old tech.
reply
How does that change my calculations? It's 200x worse than the USB miner I used for my calculations.
You would need 400 billions of these USB miners to gain 1%.
edit: and you mean 1.6GH/s. Not hour.
reply
You sir are correct. I was reading/replying while getting ready and did a poor Job at both
reply
I have been mining with USB ASIC (100GH/s solo) for four years, but I haven't mined anything.
In theory, mining depends on luck, but in reality it depends on hashrate(capital).
I'm still testing it, and if I can get bitcoins, maybe it's not unrealistic to use USB ASIC mining for decentralization purposes. I haven't got any bitcoin yet though, so I don't think it's realistic either.
reply
You using a solo usb will never see a block, statistically. You need to join a pool.
reply
This would require a decentralized usb-mining pool. That way users get some revenue and the hash can be aggregated to all users
reply
Also posted as a dedicated SN post to get more opinions on this: #188097
reply
14/0.2 = 70
S9s. This doesn't sound too bad, right? Wrong. (I included S9s because of this comment from you where you asked about 200,000 thumbdrives compared to S9s.)(0.2/(356.6*1000*1000)) * 100 ≈ 5.61e-10
% of the current hashrate.1/5.61e-10 ≈ 1,783,000,000 ≈ 2 billion
USB miners. That's more than how many iPhones were sold since it launched in 2007 [3]. There are 8 billion people on the earth. So every fourth person on earth would need to run of these USB miners to get bitcoin mining "more decentralized" by 1%.