Also, servicing legal requests related to crypto operations exhausts resources, and they probably don’t want to waste time, money, and people on those either.
Also, servicing legal requests related to crypto operations exhausts resources, and they probably don’t want to waste time, money, and people on those either.
Parent comment isn't complaining about a mining ban, but that they ban even just storing blockchain data, virtually no CPU cycles involved.
Then adding an energy usage limit would make more sense instead of a broad-usage ban, and it is significantly less invasive to examine a server’s energy expenditure rather than the server’s productive use.
Also, how do they investigate and enforce this ban? If it is possible to get banned for ‘trading,’ does this mean they are inspecting all communication and activity on instances they host?
The environmental ethics behind proof-of-work crypto is dubious at best. Maybe they’ve made a choice not to support crypto operations for ethical reasons.
this also doesn’t take into account the possibility that they’d have to increase their overall electrical capacity (amps), load distribution equipment, UPS, and generators. at cost to all other users, less runtime, more distributed cost, etc…