You are talking about server costs. Get a server at for example online.net (not affiliated) for $9/month or cheaper. That server is going to be able to run your card game easily.
You don't need to spend hundreds of dollars on AWS.
You don't know what my site requires, so you're assuming that whatever hosting you just randomly want to assume is sufficient is enough and so you can discredit my legitimate idea for a possible way to get the required cost to run my site, and possibly also make a little profit. Would you rather have me borrow user's time and attention with ads, or bottom a few of their precious millions of CPU cycles per second? And in case you didn't read what I wrote, I'm not "stealing" anything. The site will be hosted either way, if I have to pay for it out of pocket at a loss then fine. But if people would like to donate CPU time to support the project, there is an off-by-default option to do so, just like there's an off-by-default option to donate money. I fail to see how this is evil.
Ads obviously, as long as you're not using them to spread different kind of malware. It doesn't matter that much to me personally, I'll be blocking whatever garbage you put out anyway, but ads are objectively the better choice as they dont needlessly wreck the environment any further, nor cause unnecessary wear and tear on the hardware of your users.
Anyway, I'd be very interested in hearing how a card game simulator requires more than 8gb of memory and a decent cpu.
God, would you shut up? Jesus, sorry to burst your bubble but people are running their damn CPUs no matter what I do. I heard that some people would prefer client-side mining to ads and I thought I might give that option for those that want it. But I guess that'll cause the Apocalypse next Friday so I'll just go host my application at online.com™ for the low low price of $9 a month, since it's just a card game and can't possibly require anything more than that! Any idiot could see that I don't need to pollute the air and melt the ice caps by trying to give my users options and help support the development of fun internet sites! Could you be any more condescending?
Nope. If you post your idea on a public forum I will be responding with my opinion. Feel free to stop posting if you don't want my replies.
I'm also genuinely curious what kind of card game has such intensive server requirements because I just don't see it. Maybe you have a legitimate need to contribute to global warming, it just seems unlikely to me.
I mean isn't 50% better than the 100% that these crypto miners do? And those miners keep going for as long as you have the page open, not just while scrolling.
Yes. Websites stealing cpu time to mine crypto currency is ridiculous. I'd go as far as calling it malware. It's a waste of my power and will wear out my hardware faster than necessary. It's also bad for the environment due to useless power drain.
If we're talking about a server for a card game you can just get a cheapo dedicated server and you'll be fine. Get a user or two to donate once a month and you will even run a profit. Or skip that Starbucks once a month.
It's a decentralized uncensorable poker game with no rake that makes money from light client-side mining of relatively cpu efficient coins - you don't think I can build a single school from that?
The real environmental cost of ads is when people actually buy the useless shit being advertised. Also, you definitely have a strange attitude toward mining cryptocoins client-side and are engaging in many assumptions and false notions (that 100% of CPU will be used, that ad-tracking doesn't use just as many cycles, that it's not opt-in, etc.)
It's actually quite simple, any website that makes my laptop fans spin up gets closed out. None of the websites with ads trigger this behavior. The cryptominers do. If you look at actual CPU usage you will notice the obvious difference.
This makes sense, since the entire idea of crypto currency mining is to use CPU cycles to mine the crypto currency. While ads is just some basic tracking and graphics.
1. My operating costs are more than $9/month. I don't know where you got that presumed feature but it's wrong.
2. There's nothing to implement. You include a library and a few lines of code to start it and you're done.
3. How would not doing something that could potentially make me money, even if only a little bit, save me money? That makes zero sense.