Undergraduates in Manchester say they awoke to find 7ft metal fences surrounding their campus.
Students have torn down “prison-like” fencing erected around their campus on day one of England’s new lockdown.
Those living at the University of Manchester’s Fallowfield halls of residence awoke to find workers putting up “huge metal barriers”.
They were eventually pulled down as hundreds of students – who said they were not warned about the measure – protested.
The university apologised “for the concern and distress caused”.
It insisted the fencing was not intended to prevent students from entering or exiting the site but to address security concerns, “particularly about access by people who are not residents”.
But students said the fences, placed between buildings, blocked off some entry and exit points and left them feeling trapped.
Under the new lockdown rules in England, university students have been told not to move back and forward between their permanent homes and student homes during term time. The government says they should only return home at the end of term.
First-year management student Megan, who did not want to give her surname, said: “Morale is really low, we’re really disappointed we didn’t hear about this beforehand and about the fact it went up without any explanation.
“They’re huge metal barriers, they’re connected to one another and there’s literally no gaps.
“There is fencing around the whole outside, we feel like it’s completely unnecessary. It makes it feel like we’re in a prison.”
Fellow first-year, English literature undergraduate Ewan, said the 7ft (2.1m) fencing was a further blow to many who had already spent weeks isolating.
“It’s not like living at home, we don’t have a sofa, we have a kitchen and plastic chairs,” he said.
“There’s no way you can relax there. You’re in a completely different city and you do feel lonely there and trapped.”
Ewan was among those who attended the protest where much of the fencing was torn down.
“People were dragging them down and jumping on them,” he said.
“We walked on the grass that was restricted by the fences. We did a lap of the whole campus.”
The University of Manchester insists the fencing was to keep people out of the Fallowfield campus. Students accuse the university of “trapping” them within it.
The prevalence of coronavirus at the University of Manchester’s campuses has fallen dramatically in recent weeks.
The university’s student population is around 40,000.
In the week to 5 October, when classes were first getting under way, there were about 2,940 cases per 100,000 among its students.
Data from Public Health England also shows that infection rates in the areas surrounding University of Manchester student accommodation have also tapered off.
Between the week ending 3 October and week ending 31 October:
Fallowfield Central rates have dropped from 5,256 cases per 100,000 to 527 cases
Hulme and University rates have dropped from 1,283 cases per 100,000 people to 191 cases
Victoria Park rates have dropped from 771 cases per 100,000 to 419 cases
Apart from Fallowfield, which had a very high peak, the case rates for other student areas in Manchester are below the average for the city as a whole, which stood at 456 cases per 100,000 as of 31 October.
The university initially insisted it had written to students informing them about the construction, but has since acknowledged work began “ahead of the message being seen”.
In a statement, President and Vice-Chancellor Prof Dame Nancy Rothwell said the fencing was not meant to cause distress nor prevent students from entering or exiting the site.
It was intended, she said, to address safety and security concerns from students and staff, “particularly about access by people who are not residents”.
“The fences are being taken down from Friday morning and students are being contacted immediately,” she said.
“Alternative security measures, including additional security patrols are being put in place.”
US visas granted to Chinese mainland students have plummeted 99 percent compared to last year. Chinese students are also increasingly deciding not to study in the US due to the COVID-19 pandemic, intensified racism and anti-China sentiments.
The US granted visas to 808 Chinese mainland students between April and the end of September, a 99 percent drop from the same period last year, according to a new report by Nikkei Asia, citing US State Department data. More than 30 percent of international students in the US are from China, the most of any country.
The visas granted to students from other Asian countries including India, Japan and South Korea have also plummeted more than 70 percent, the report said.
The report cited the pandemic, racism and so-called “Chinese espionage”, as excuses which the US uses to refuse Chinese students. This apparent academic decoupling is bilateral as many Chinese students are worried about their safety in the country.
A Chinese student at Harvard University surnamed Zhang told the Global Times on Thursday that since the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, Asians especially Chinese are experiencing rising racist sentiments.
Zhang attributed the racial discrimination to the current US administration’s endless lies and slander against China.
Another Chinese student surnamed Tang from the University of Florida said the US handling of COVID-19 was much worse than they had expected.
Zhang and Tang have returned to China, where they say it’s safer and are taking online courses from their universities.
An education consultant in charge of undergraduate program applications in a Beijing-based agency said some students who had earlier decided to postpone their enrollment are now considering declining offers from US schools.
The consultant noted that students who have not yet applied are hesitating applying to US schools due to the coronavirus and China-US tensions.
More Chinese students and their parents are also worried about rising violence and an anti-China atmosphere in the US.
Media reports said between March to June more than 2,100 anti-Asian hate cases related to COVID-19 were reported across the US.
TechCrunch4 said the so-called “Chinese espionage” in the US has played a large role in the drop of granted visas to Chinese mainland students.
US authorities announced in September the cancellation of visas granted to at least 1,000 students and researchers “linked to the Chinese military.”
Observers noted that as tensions between China and the US intensify, the US government is likely to take tougher measures to further restrict overseas students.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry said earlier the US measures are outright political persecution and racial discrimination, which seriously violates the rights of Chinese students studying abroad.
In a series of articles sponsored by Kaepernick Publishing, a Princeton professor stated that policing is “inherently predatory and violent.”
She also said that “reform the police” usually means to “reward the police” as they “brutalize and kill.”
Princeton University African-American Studies professor Naomi Murakawa criticized the conversation surrounding police reform, noting that the goal to “reform the police” usually means to “reward the police” as they allegedly “brutalize and kill.”
Her argument is one of 30 articles penned for the “Abolition for the People” project, which is sponsored by Kaepernick Publishing, which was founded “to create opportunities for Black and Brown writers, authors, and creators to control their narratives and retain ownership.” Its namesake founder, former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, gained notoriety after kneeling during the national anthem in an attempt to draw attention to police brutality.
“The more police brutalize and kill, the greater their budgets for training, hiring, and hardware.” https://t.co/MnvM9IYC1e— Colin Kaepernick (@Kaepernick7) October 21, 2020
“Not only do police and prisons fail to make us safer, but reform has only strengthened their most toxic ingrained practices,” argues the project’s introduction. “The only answer is abolition, a full dismantling of the carceral state and the institutions that support it.”
In her article, Murakawa argues that “policing is intrinsically predatory and violent.” She asserted that the police “push millions of people into the carceral state, where racial disparity and other inequities rise through each circle of hell.”
She took issue with conventional means of reforming police departments in the United States. For instance, she said that body cameras expanded “police surveillance powers.” As evidence, she cited the fact that police officers captured images of Black Lives Matter protesters during the summer of 2020.
Similarly, Murakawa says that chokehold bans change the “technique of killing but not the fact of killing.” She compares police moving to different methods of restraining suspects — such as the use of stun guns — to executioners replacing the noose with the electric chair, and then later the chemical cocktail.
“The technique of execution does not comfort the dead. It comforts the executioners — and all their supporters,” she asserted.
More broadly, Murakawa asserts that the mentality surrounding police reform is fundamentally flawed.
“Policing is not law’s absence,” she explained: “it is law’s essence in a system of racial capitalism.” In this system, she adds, “laws affirmatively protect the police’s right to racially profile, to lie, and to kill.”
Campus Reform reached out to Murakawa for comment but did not receive a response in time for publication.
Williamson seeks to end unfairness in university admissions by switching to offers based on real results.
Universities in England are to switch to offering degree places on the basis of actual grades rather than predicted ones, the government has announced.
In an interview with BBC Education Editor Branwen Jeffreys, Gavin Williamson said the present system held bright but disadvantaged pupils back.
He said he wanted all students to be able to choose the best university they can go to once they know their grades.
Universities have just backed such a change following a review.
Currently, pupils are offered places from universities ahead of their results, so decisions are based on predictions made by their teachers.
Once A-level, BTEC and other exam results are issued in August, candidates then accept or refuse offers they have received.
A consultation will be carried out but it is expected the change to what is known as a post-qualification admissions system will take place before the next general election.
Analysis by Education Editor Branwen Jeffreys
The current system relies heavily on predicted grades which puts academically high achieving pupils from poorer areas at a disadvantage.
But there are still big questions about how this would work, with universities favouring a system in which students would still apply before exams but receive offers afterwards.
Others may push for the more radical option of both applications and offers being made after results, pushing the start of term back to January for first year students.
Mr Williamson told the BBC: “I want all students to look at the grades they’ve got and then see what is the best university that they can get to, what is the best course they can do.
“I want to smash through these ceilings that are preventing them from meeting their full potential.”
He said pupils from less-affluent, non-traditional backgrounds often did not have to the confidence to aim for a highly selective university, and also often lacked advice about how to reach such goals.
The move comes after years of debate over post-qualification admissions.
‘Breeding unfairness’
Numerous academic studies suggest pupils from working class backgrounds, and some ethnic groups, tend to be predicted lower grades by their teachers.
The university admissions system was brought into sharp focus in the summer, when exam results were cancelled, leading to thousands of students losing the places they thought they had not qualified for.
Universities promised to offer as many places as they could if candidates received the grades they needed after results were re-issued.
Mr Williamson said the use of predicted grades limited “the aspirations of students before they know what they can achieve”.
“We need to radically change a system which breeds low aspiration and unfairness,” he added.
“We’re going to deliver this before next election, we’re going to do an extensive consultation.
“But there’s a real determination what we’ve seen in this pandemic, we’ve seen great challenges that society has had to deal with and as we move out of this pandemic we need to build back better.”
Mr Williamson also criticised universities which offer inducements or conditional unconditional offers to some students to lure them on to their courses.
“What we’ve seen over the last few years is what I describe as a little bit of sharp practice where universities have been offering unconditional offers, more and more and creating incentives, in terms of offering laptops or cash back to those students, and that means those students aren’t choosing the course and the university that is best to meet their future potential.
“We want to move away from that.”
The plan has received a warm welcome from vice-chancellors’ organisation, Universities UK, who had resolved to move to post qualification admissions following an 18-months review.
Jo Grady, general secretary of the University and College Union (UCU), said: “The current system is based on inaccurately predicted results and leads to those from less-affluent backgrounds losing out.
“Allowing students to apply after they receive their results will help level the playing field and put a stop to the chaotic clearing scramble.”
Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said: “Teachers work hard and diligently to provide accurate predicted grades, but it is not an exact science and never can be.
He agreed: “Post-qualification admissions would be better and fairer.”
Students could be routinely issued university offers based on actual exam results rather than predicted grades in future, under a proposed shake-up.
A post-qualifications admissions (PQA) system could be introduced across the UK by 2023-24, says Universities UK.
The plan is one of a series of recommendations from an 18-month review by university leaders across Britain.
It comes after a chaotic summer exam results process meant many students lost places on their chosen courses.
Some reports over the years have suggested a switch to exam results, arguing it would be fairer to candidates from less-affluent backgrounds.
But universities previously cited the timescale between results day and courses starting as a reason not to proceed.
Interviews
The review also calls for the scrapping of “conditional unconditional offers”, under which students are offered guaranteed places regardless of results if they make an institution their firm choice.
It says the use of regular unconditional offers should be restricted to specific circumstances, including where such decisions have been informed by an interview, audition, submission of work or a skills test.
A new code of practice should be developed to make clear that the use of incentives in offer-making, such as financial inducements, should not add any pressure to candidates, the report adds.
Failure to follow the code would result in sanctions against universities, UUK said.
The recommendations come after the universities admissions service Ucas proposed that students could apply to university after receiving their A-levels, and then start courses in January.
But the UUK report raises concerns about the disruption that would cause to school timetables and university competitiveness overseas.
‘Fairer to students’
The review acknowledges that switching to PQA might still be challenging for courses that are highly selective, as it could be difficult to arrange interviews, and there may be an increase in admissions tests.
It could also mean there were fewer teachers available over the summer to help students make decisions, and less time for applicants to respond to offers.
The organisation says it will consult universities, schools and government to develop and further test the workability of the new approach.
Professor Quintin McKellar, vice-chancellor of the University of Hertfordshire and chairman of the Fair Admissions Review, said: “There isn’t a perfect one-size-fits-all solution for the variety of courses and institutions, but the review has decided it would be fairer for students to receive university places based on exam results, not predictions.”
He added that any change should be taken forward carefully by universities, with further consultation with students, government, and those working across the education sector.
“We need to be confident that any new process will allow for effective careers advice and support for applicants,” he said.
Jo Grady, general secretary of the University and College Union (UCU), said: “The current system is based on inaccurately predicted results and leads to those from less-affluent backgrounds losing out.
“Allowing students to apply after they receive their results will help level the playing field and put a stop to the chaotic clearing scramble.”
She added: “UCU and many sector leaders now agree the time has come for the UK to join the rest of the world and finally to move away from the current unfair system.”
Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said: “Teachers work hard and diligently to provide accurate predicted grades, but it is not an exact science and never can be.
“Post-qualification admissions would be better and fairer.”
Megan Zogby – Accreditation agencies have the responsibility of judging whether colleges are offering students a quality education. Since COVID-19, however, their biggest changes have been to dismiss concerns about short-changing students. This change can be seen most clearly with online classes.
Ordinarily, accreditation standards would ensure educational quality, and schools that cut corners would risk penalties and fines. Now, however, standards have been suspended.
To allow the flexibility that the current COVID-19 situation requires, the Department is waiving the normal process by which accrediting agencies are required to develop, seek public comment, and enact new policies for the limited purpose of allowing agencies to implement the changes described above (and in the earlier distance education communication), so long as the policy changes are approved by the agency’s board (or other decision-making body).
The effects of the pandemic have pushed the Department to see their rules as too restrictive. More flexibility means more experimentation, and accrediting agencies will take a hands-off approach as colleges try new methods to replace in-person classes.
That new strategy also relies on users—the students—to determine what online teaching method works best. “If students don’t think an online course is good enough, they’ll just drop it. We’ll have competition unfettered by outside ‘experts,’” said George Leef, the Martin Center’s director of editorial content.
If accreditation rules have been holding back colleges from making improvements, perhaps the Department of Education should reconsider how much power accreditors deserve. The Department could solicit more student and faculty feedback on what makes a course high-quality instead of using outside evaluators like accreditors. Student and faculty input could go a long way to improving quality and using their feedback to determine the best types of online classes. Empowering those who experience the benefits and the costs of higher ed during the pandemic could mean a dramatic improvement, even in uncertain times.
A group of students at Swarthmore College have filed a formal complaint with the federal government that alleges administrators mishandle and under report sexual assault crimes on campus.
Swarthmore is the latest in a growing list of institutions across the nation to be hit with claims of administrators sweeping various sexual assault crimes under the rug.
The students behind the Swarthmore College complaint allege campus officials have failed to comply with the Clery Act, a 1998 statute that requires all universities receiving federal student loans to disclose criminal behavior that occurs on or near campus.
Concerned that Swarthmore’s administration has not adequately addressed allegations of sexual assault, Mia Ferguson and Hope Brinn, two Swarthmore sophomores, filed the complaint April 18 along with the testimonies of 10 other students. It will be reviewed by the Department of Education in the coming weeks.
In filing their complaint, Ferguson and Brinn consulted with two 2011 graduates of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who spearheaded a similar complaint against their campus, also citing the Clery Act.
Ferguson, Brinn and the other 10 students claim campus officials persistently under report incidents of sexual battery, sexual assault, and rape; and that some victims are harassed and intimidated, among other allegations.
A recent article in The New York Times describes Brinn’s situation, in which a “fellow student repeatedly sexually harassed her and broke into her room in the middle of the night.”
“Ms. Brinn … said that college administrators tried to dissuade her from making a formal complaint, made light of what had happened, said that she was partly to blame, and in their official records, inaccurately described her allegations to make them seem less serious,” the article states.
The students’ formal allegation against Swarthmore arrived just three days after the college’s president, Rebecca Chopp, announced she and the dean of students, Liz Braun, would pursue an external review of Swarthmore’s procedures, policies and sanctions dealing with sexual misconduct.
In an April 15 campus-wide email, Chopp stated: “[W]e have zero tolerance for sexual assault, abuse, and violence on our campus. It is against the law, it is wrong, and we must all continue to reinforce the message that even one such incident is too many on our campus.”
But Brinn told Swarthmore’s Daily Gazette that an external review was “insufficient,” citing more “systemic” issues. Ferguson said she wishes to frame the issue of sexual assault within “a national movement.”
That “movement” seems to have had a domino effect, with Swarthmore women consulting UNC graduates, the UNC women consulting women who have made similar complaints at Amherst, and Amherst women drawing upon the work of advocates at Yale.
In fact, the same day Swarthmore students filed their complaint, similar ones were also lodged by students at Occidental College – who also touched base with college women behind similar allegations across the nation.
The complaint against Swarthmore comes during what Chopp has called the “spring of our discontent.”
The semester has been full of student dissent, including a controversial student chalking campaign against supposed “rape culture,” a failed referendum to remove Greek life from the campus, and scheduled commencement speaker Robert Zolleick’s withdrawal from the ceremony after student attacks on his record.
After weeks of contention, Chopp called for a community meeting, where more than 200 students, faculty and staff gathered. Most of the conversation centered on the administration’s response to sexual assault. The meeting was described as emotional and meaningful. Dean Braun admitted she “was really moved.” Unknown to the administration, the Clery complaint was in the works before the meeting.
President Chopp has said she has not seen the official legal complaint yet, but plans to fully cooperate with the Department of Education’s investigation.
Instead of buying or trading bitcoins and bitcoin mining, a group of users prefers to earn bitcoin revenue by participating in a bitcoin cloud mining company. The cryptocurrency revolution began with Bitcoin, which is now the largest cryptocurrency. The value of this virtual currency has reached 61,235.00 dollars on November 4, 2021, and on 13 April 2021, it reached its maximum value, ie 63729 dollars. According to the CoinMarketCap list, the most popular cryptocurrencies to date have been Bitcoin. Bitcoin is managed as a digital currency in a digital head office called Blockchain. The main feature of blockchain is its decentralization, which is managed without the need for a centralized institution such as banks. Bitcoin mining is based on this blockchain. Those who are interested in making money from Bitcoin but do not want to have scientific information about Bitcoin can participate in Bitcoin cloud mining. Bitcoin is an institutional currency that ordinary people, as miners, are responsible for producing, disseminating, and managing.
Bitcoin mining
Blockchain technology is very powerful and guarantees secure transactions. Transaction records are stored permanently and irreplaceably in a blockchain that looks like a digital database. Transaction verification operations are performed by blockchain consensus algorithms. The miners in the blockchain each have the status of a node in the network. These nodes are responsible for verifying transactions. By confirming the transactions, new bitcoins will be mined in the network. The factor that prevents cryptocurrencies from inflating is the limited number of cryptocurrencies. In the case of bitcoin, only 21 million units will be mined. One of the most important factors in determining the value of a cryptocurrency is its public acceptance. Each cryptocurrency has different mining methods. Here we are talking about bitcoin mining and then we will talk about bitcoin cloud mining.
What is the concept of a bitcoin mining operation? Mining allows new currencies to be generated and used to validate transactions. To understand what mining is and how bitcoin cloud mining works, we need to understand the concept of the blockchain.For a practical example, suppose you use Bitcoin to buy books online. First, select the book and add it to your cart. Now you choose your payment method to pay by Bitcoin. Your transaction enters a queue that, like other transactions, is awaiting approval. The last block in the blockchain continues to capture inputs until the block volume is full. The final size limit for each block is currently 1 MB of data. When a block is filled and the transactions inside the block are completed, the miner is rewarded. Of course, to confirm the reaction, the power of the miner hardware is used to solve complex mathematical problems. Then it can connect your purchase transaction to the blockchain.People interested in making money from Bitcoin mining can rent hash power from Bitcoin cloud mining companies and participate in mining to earn money.The solution to this complex mathematical problem is a hexadecimal number called a hash. The reward for solving the problem is given in the same unit of cryptocurrency. Of course, not all miners get this reward, but only the first person who gets the right answer and announces the right hash will be rewarded. Others will only receive electricity bills. Therefore, in crypto mining, you may earn money or you may not earn anything. If you cannot use powerful computing hardware for mining then this can be a waste of time. As a result, those who do not have powerful devices are advised to participate in bitcoin cloud mining to earn money from bitcoin.
Equipment
How can miners access the correct hash? The blockchain network can reach a numeric value that is the same as the hash after each 2016 block. The difficulty of the mining network needs to be balanced so that it only takes about ten minutes to become a mined block.The headers of each block are used to identify a block, which is an 80-byte string of information. The data that shows the specifications of a block includes the generated bitcoin number, the previous block hash, and the next block hash.In the bitcoin mining process, the SHA-256 algorithm is used to reach the desired hash value. The first miner who can do this is rewarded. This is a competition between miners participating in mining. In the early years of Bitcoin, mining was very easy, and anyone could mine a block with their laptop. At the moment this is difficult for ordinary people and it is recommended to engage in bitcoin cloud mining. Over time, a large number of people became acquainted with bitcoin, and with the welcome of the people, the value of bitcoin increased day by day, and as a result, more people turned to the mining industry. The increase in the number of miners’ hardware increased the difficulty of the mining network. So now, to achieve the reward of the block, only dedicated devices with high processing power should be used. For this reason, bitcoin mining is difficult for people who have regular devices, and it is recommended that they make money from bitcoin through bitcoin cloud mining.
What are the types of bitcoin mining? Those who cannot or do not want to spend a lot of money to buy mining equipment can use other methods to participate in mining. One of these methods is Bitcoin cloud mining, which we will discuss. There are other different options for mining. If we want to divide the mining activity according to the number of participants, we will have two groups: Solo and Pool.If you buy mining hardware and use these devices yourself, they are called CPU mining or GPU mining. If you rent devices, this method is called bitcoin Cloud Mining.The performance of the solo method is as follows:
In individual mining, one works independently, which costs a lot but can be rewarded on its own. The equipment used in mining consumes a lot of electrical energy. Anyone who can find the correct hash faster and more powerfully gets access to the blockchain reward. In this type of mining, you have to pay for the cooling of the devices and their location. You also need to install a mining rig, which is more expensive, to increase revenue. You can read more about the advantages and disadvantages of Solo mining VS Pool mining to gain more information about the mining best practice.
Of course, the difficulty of mining is true of Bitcoin and several other valuable currencies. But some cryptocurrencies can be mined and monetized with little investment. It is recommended that those who want to avoid the hassle of buying, maintaining, repairing, and updating devices should participate in Bitcoin cloud mining.
Solo mining VS Pool mining
Is Bitcoin Mining an acceptable method for beginners? Crypto mining seems to be suitable for users who have technical skills in hardware and software to be able to earn money in this profession. Because the cryptocurrency market is volatile and unpredictable, it is advisable to look for reliable ways to monetize devices before investing with hard-earned capital. Be profitable in this market.Discard GPU or CPU mining methods. Because with these methods, you only cause the depreciation of your devices and shorten their life. After that, you waste your time, and you are left with heavy electricity bills.It is recommended to participate in Bitcoin cloud mining companies for a safe and low-risk income. Minerland is one of the most trusted companies in the field of bitcoin cloud mining. Start with less investment and then enter into more investment contracts once you are sure of your profit. In this case, you will benefit much more.
Mining Farm
How does pool mining work to earn money from Bitcoin? Many people have been able to earn money by crypto mining. They have been able to succeed with sufficient information, capital resources, and appropriate equipment.Before entering the world of cryptocurrency mining, it is necessary to examine every factor that affects currency mining. These factors include mining location, electrical energy, hardware devices, device installation software, cooling devices, and more. If people who are interested in making money from bitcoin mining have limited resources, it is better to rent mining devices from bitcoin cloud mining companies and earn money this way.If your device has limited computing power, it is better to connect to the mining pool. The pools are like a large team that extracts with extensive equipment. People with low power devices can participate in pool activities. They will be rewarded for their participation in hash calculations.
Suppose you connect to a large mining pool. In this case, the profit received by the miners differs with different hash amounts. In a real example, a miner with a hash rate of 520 M / s connected to the F2POOL pool was able to earn $ 31.7 a day. Now, if a user joins the pool only with his graphics card, his profit will be less. If a user has multiple GPUs at the same time, it is possible to get a better profit. The chart below shows the statistics of mined blocks in percentage for the most famous pools in 2020.
Mining Pools percentage
The important point is that each user must calculate the cost of electricity consumed by their devices at the place where they installed their devices. Most of the time the cost of bills is so high that it may outweigh the benefits of mining. In this case, not only did the person not make a profit, but he also made a loss. It is recommended that people who cannot purchase hardware, can rent mining devices from bitcoin cloud mining companies to participate in crypto mining remotely and enjoy a secure profit.
How do partner with Cloud Mining companies? Another way to make money from Cloud Mining is to sign a partnership agreement with Bitcoin cloud mining companies. Users can sign a contract with a Bitcoin cloud mining center. These companies rent their mining devices to users. In this case, users will not be involved in technical and hardware problems, as well as the installation and execution of software programs. They will not have to worry about maintaining and repairing the devices and updating them.
Users only need to pay for each contract periodically. Depending on what currencies Bitcoin cloud mining supports, the user can enter into a contract for that currency with the company and pay the company for the cost of mining that currency. Since contracts are concluded periodically, interest is calculated depending on the duration of the contract.
The contracts of Bitcoin cloud mining are a way to monetize cryptocurrencies. This method is suitable for people who want to invest in the cryptocurrency market with low capital. Operations in Bitcoin cloud mining companies are fully managed by the company owners. Subscribers only invest in this company and according to the contract they have concluded with the company, they can be rewarded from the company based on the hash rate they buy.
Is partnering with cloud mining profitable? Users should know that they are paying for the contract with bitcoin cloud mining in advance. Contract profits cannot be predicted because the crypto market is volatile. However, the capital you pay for a contract in Bitcoin cloud mining is less than buying currency in the open market. So participating in bitcoin mining can be a lucrative business. If you participate in this business through Bitcoin cloud mining, you can make a profit. Users who want to join a Bitcoin cloud mining company need to pay attention to important factors in choosing this company. These factors include the initial investment to participate in the company, the reputation of the Bitcoin cloud mining Company, how profits are paid to subscribers, the amount of hash power to extract cryptocurrencies, the number of coins the company supports, and more. If you consider all the cases, it will be possible to make the right choice and everything will go right. Minerland is an online bitcoin cloud mining provider that leases its users the computing power used for mining. In this case, users can easily start bitcoin mining. The users can create an account, select a mining contract, pay a fee, and earn their bitcoin.
