While you could argue that it's not mining or that it is mining; if Google finds out they will most likely shut down your account. To them, it would probably be considered mining. On their side they would see consistent high CPU usage, they wouldn't care that BOINC isn't traditional mining. Google would see that you are using their cloud platform to earn Gridcoin and would terminate your account. I don't mean for this to sound harsh, but I think it's important to know.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
What if you don't sign up for Gridcoin? And use BOINC like it was used for 6 years up to one year ago? If someone lauch a cryptocurrency that is awarded for using a search-engine, you think "searching" would be considered mining? Because, no - that's not how definitions work.
Well, definitions do change. Langauge changes. As to using BOINC without using team Gridcoin, Google doesn't want people using their cloud platform 24/7 for non-cloud related things. Let's follow your example with the imaginary search-engine cryptocurrency. If you were just using a search engine without using the cryptocurrency, that wouldn't be mining. Let's say you were, in fact, using it to earn this cryptocurrency. Many would consider that mining. Just like if you run the SHA-256 Hash for no reason, it isn't Bitcoin mining, but if you intend to earn Bitcoin, that would be mining. Many people would define mining as earning cryptocurrencies through some action that timestamps the blockchain either alone or in a group (maybe not in those exact words, but something similar). I am not saying that your definition of mining is inherently wrong. Rather I am saying that Google's definition would have the final say in whether or not your account would/should be terminated.
Now, I agree with most of what you said.
Who knows what's google's real intentions. We've got terms and conditions to specifically and accurately make sure the intentions are satisfied.
In my opinion, and by consumer's rights any unclarity in such circumstances should be considered towards consumer's benefit, at least until the terms are clarified. However if there is a specified time offer, the terms can't be changed without both sides consent before the agreed time has expired - That would be the case of most commercial legally-binding offers.
I don't want to go on any warpath over this method. All I'm saying is that as for now it is fine to use it and doesn't breach terms and conditions. Shall google ever relate to this specific use of their service - I will be the first one to post this information as an update for the guide.
Currently I simply appreciate google's generosity and gladly and smartly contribute to research that really matters.
Also @roboticmind , you're the first person to approach this controversial subject with logic, manners and intelligence. So I'm happy to upvote your comment.