well, when they knew it and had these intentions from the very beginning without saying a word to customers, it does not look good at all for them. Not only Genesis Mining, generally. This is a deceptive strategy.
I also won
t bash anymore, only tell one last thing. When earlier customers were purchasing hashrates they had no idea how many hashes one GPU could provide. When i first launched official zcashd miner and saw 1 h/s or even less, i have read about high memory demand, asic-resistance, etc. On this background offers for cloud mining I saw seemed acceptable. BUT: at that moment I as well as many other customers thought that many devices/GPUs are needed to guarantee say 50 hashes. And the price seemed aceptable considering that volume of GPUs required. Hashrate offered by cloud services was increasing with the time, but not by the same rate as solvers efficiency. Zeropond has currently even worser conditions. But they promissed to fix it when a better miner appears, so i do very believe they will do it. But with the current situation when the total network hashrate is much higher due to improved miners, and hashrate of cloud mining also increased, but not comparable with the jump in miners efficiency within latest few days, cloud mining looks as for me very doubtful. This means that hashrate, which earlier would had been assured by say 4,5 or even more GPUs now can be achieved by only one GPU. Thus, i was ready to pay, because I knew that i pay for renting of several GPUs and respective expenses for electricity, and so on. Now i dont know what i pay for, because those roughly 50 hashes can be performed by only one GPU now and even more improvements are possible in the nearest future. I ask myself what to pay $2330 for? And there is no answer to this. If Genesis says they have the most efficient miner, then they need only 1 GPU to reach 50 hashes (of course this is extremely roughly just as example, depends on GPU). In this case the question comes up again, isn
t 2330 too much for renting one GPU for one year? If they use several GPUs to guarantee this hashrate then they are probably not using the most efficient software and can increase hashpower for customers just by switching to another miner This woould not cause any extra expenses for additional equipment for them and would please customers. Or maybe they dont want doing it for some uncertain reason, or they will do this or have already switched, but customers are not aware of it, so the only side who gets more profit is the cloud cervice. The entire system is not transparent. We buy hashes, but they are still strongly bound to devices and miners efficiency. When GM stated that hashpower will grow with the algorithm enhancing we all relied on this. In fact sutuation turned out very twisted. Nobody wants to pay for 1 GPU the same amount of money that was supposed to cover several GPUs. Increase in hashrate given by cloud services was not comparable with the increase in miners efficiency as far as i can judge. This would be the question to Zeropond as well, I hope they find a decent solution for this.