Comment on If you save, we will charge you more

• HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  You specified energy in your example, not me. And I hinted that a hookup fee would likely be dependent on the rated power capacity of the user.

  It is likely that a residential crypto miner would likely need to upgrade what they can draw from the grid.

  source

  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    They have 200A service, same as you. They don’t need to upgrade.

    The difference is that they are using 200A 24/7/365, while you probably average less than 10A, and rarely exceed 50A.

    They are literally using 20 times as much power as you, and you’re saying they should be paying the same fees as you.

    One such cryptoboy per block and the total consumption in the region doubles. The infrastructure costs double. Your “flat fee” doubles, because it is divided evenly among the users, rather than assigned to the cryptoboys who created it.

    And you’re saying this is a good thing?

    I feel like I’ve entered the fucking twilight zone here.

    source

    • HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      No one is saying you should pay the same total bill as they do, just the same connection fee if you and crypto boy have the same hookup.

      You’d pay $10 for a connection fee and $1 for power while they’d pay $10 for a connection fee and $1000 for power.

      source

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Understood.

        And that “$10 connection fee” makes perfect sense for covering per-user administrative costs. The cost is the same to send a $1 bill or a $1000 bill to the customer; a per-user fee to cover that administrative fee is not unreasonable.

        But they aren’t talking about administration. They are talking about infrastructure maintenance. Infrastructure is a shared resource, and the maintenance charges scale (primarily) with total consumption, not per-user.

        source