Bitcoin Forum

I’m a user of BONIC, which produces Gridcoins (if you do the work in whitelisted projects), and I’m wondering why Gridcoin is not a major coin? I mean here you actually produce something useful with your idled computer, rather than just burning electricity for the sack of a blockchain.

I’m aware that many coins have a purpose in themselves, but the process of producing those coins is just burning electricity for no purpose. Gridcoin solves some problem/problems and then gives you coins for that.

If you check a bit the altcoins world, there are a lot of token based on a really interesting and usefull purpose. The problem remain the same in every business. It'll gain value and fame only if people are interested in it.
If the project is great but nobody wants to use it, the principle of offer and demand is not matched, and the project (as beautiful as it is) will not raise.

You are quite right, and I do understand that usability of a project vs interest does not always (far from it) end up in a symbioses relationship.  I also understand that many coins in themselves have great potential and systems/ideas. But it is the coins / systems themselves that is the potential, not the process that produce the coins. We are still moving dirt from on pile to another, for no reason what so ever, other than that produces coins.

Why are those billion Tflops mining bitcoins not curing cancer at the same time? They might as well!

In real life – setting aside a few government projects – nobody is getting paid for digging holes for no reason what so ever. In bitcoin universe I get paid for digging holes in my backyard, filling them up again and starting all over.

It is not like someone has to pay for it. I don’t not understand why we can’t solve some meaningfully problem / project, and at the same time produce coins? – Like they do in Gridcoin, hens the question, why is Gridcoin not a major coin.

It is certainly nonsense to put the burned electricity and the value of the coin in direct dependence. The value of a coin depends largely on the trust of customers. If you look at how different these or that coins differ from each other? Well, the algorithm is to a small extent. In general, this subjective name and the value of the coin still largely depends on the conducted Ico, or how competently advertised.

The answer is, sadly, people don't care.  A majority of BTC values comes from its use as a status symbol.

Gridcoin is a wonderful project, and I agree with all of your points, but at the end of the day, it's the nerd of the AltCoin world.

If you really want to help, why not get local businesses involved?  Plenty of non-profits would likely be glad to add their spare processing cycles on their various machines, the odds are they just don't know it's possible.

GRC will never be popular, but it quietly helps change the world.  BTC will always be popular, and accomplishes nothing beyond existing for the sake of existance.

Wherever you are, I assume there's a local org that would be thrilled to help.  Call them up, get a meeting and educate them.

Supply and demand, apparently there's no demand for the coin you hold. It might change though.
I find it a big problem aswell, the huge waste of electricity and if you can recommend some projects that are willing to solve this then I will definitely have a look.
But BTC will be THE coin so I think its in the best interest for everyone if projects stop trying to replace other coins, something they will likely never succeed in.
And try to solve problems in the ecosystem as it is.

Top list coins will be listed in coon market cap site with the supply and cost information of the every coins. If the token is not been added yet you cannot find the cost too.
These mind coins can mine using with lower hash rate and can be done your laptop or GPU like satoshi things bitcoin should be mine long lasting. Increase of block size transaction load stop bitcoin from that out.

And for example, I do not care how the coin is called. Also, a lot depends on how you trade them. If, for example, it is a portfolio investment, then you buy 50 coins for each deposit, each up to 2 percent of the deposit. Criterion. The price is at the bottom, large volotility, large volume. And put on sale half of each coin for 100 percent and arrange signals. This is called stupid investing.

I'm not sure what you're saying?  Or how it relates to the question?

perhaps these two elements, which exist parallel to each other and are quietly co-exist without any mutual interest. I mean scientist people and the cryptographic society. Gridcoin offspring which tried to unite these different communities, it seems wrong.

This is not a push for Gridcoin. I’m well aware that Bitcoin is the coin for now, and probably for time to come. And I don’t really care of the value of Gridcoin (unless it’s worth a million $).

However is the any technical reason why bitcoin mining could not solve scientific problems instead of solving mathematical problems that has no function other than itself, and pay coins either way? Anybody know the inside of bitcoin mining that can answer such a question?

Why would that seem wrong? They are both solving equations. Seems like logical symbioses.A win-win for all.

It's not just about saving energy or likewise.
Coins need to be unique in use to come as major player.
Bitcoin is father of all, had a headstart.
Ethereum was father of (easy) sidechain tokens.
Monero\Zcash advocated privacy.

A mature brain will never say that popularity or success is dependent on the value of a coin. Blaming the value individually is not a good approach. It actually depends on the customer’s belief and the understanding. If the clients are comfortable and the number of customers increases, then the value and popularity will begin to fly.

It surely is a great project, and I have to learn more about it.
I suppose it's not a major cryptocurrency because there are not enough economic inventives in the coin. In crypto, altruistic properties seem not to be enough to put a cryptocurrency in a great spot.

While not quite Gridcoin, as I haven't followed that one closely.  I actively "mine" Curecoins, which is GridCoins alternative in Folding@home instead of BOINC.  While the coin itself isn't starting the world on fire price wise.  The Curecoin team has surpassed all the other teams and is currently the #1 folding team in the world.  I prefer Folding@home, as it is focused primarily on finding cures for diseases.  BOINC seems to have way to many offshoots, both projects are great though, and I have folded for both in the past.

I'd say, for the same reason why Dogecoin and Pepe cash are more popular.
People like what's fancy, not what's actually useful.

Also, the dev team does not really seem interested in advertising. I mean, they are "kinda" doing something... but not enough IMO.