I'm not saying that's the exact number; that depends on a lot of things. My point is that this is a great deal more plausible an outcome than your intuition may think. (It could even be worse.)
A similar idea was in vogue in the oughties about loading JS onto web pages and having people compute things while visiting CNN or something. But especially on the much slower JS of the time, and with no access to GPUs, by the time you worked out all the multiplicative slowdowns involved, and dealt with the crazy broken communications topology (radically slower than in-memory bandwidth, etc.), you were looking at loading down millions of people's machines to get the equivalent of single digit high-power dedicated machines for all but very embarrassingly parallel problems. You were better off just buying the CPU power.
("Well then, what about Seti@Home and such?" All embarrassingly parallel problems running native clients, at high rates of utilization. That's a several orders of magnitude more efficient than running things when a visitor happens to visit some web page (terrible utilization), on a slow JS VM, in a single thread.)