Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yeah, that's the thing, isn't it? You sink that much investment into a mainframe, you're going to be having better things to do with them than mine bitcoin.

Although, yet another idle thought; maybe IBM themselves have 'tested' a machine, if anyone.

EDIT: typos,grammar.



You buy a mainframe for the I/O it can do, not the computation (for which you'd want a supercomputer).


Oh I realise that, I used to use them, I do roughly recall their benefits ;)

I was just asking out of idle curiosity, nothing more.


[deleted]


If you need to to lots of relatively simple things very quickly but also very reliably. You'd not use a supercomputer to process credit card transactions for example, you'd want a mainframe for that. And you wouldn't use a mainframe for weather forecasting.


Why on earth would they do that, the depreciation on the machine would be higher than the amount of $ generated that way and that's ignoring the cost of the energy and the facility to host it.

It would make absolutely no sense.


I read 'tested' as a few minutes, for fun, experimental purposes rather than profit.


Yes, that was my intention with 'tested'. I'm sure IBM have the resources to jazz up something a bit more application specific if they really wanted.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: