2x R9 290's getting just shy of 700Kh/s each (headless) - looking at other things to tweak to try and reach that point.

scrypt vs scrypt-jane hash rate drop doesn't appear to be a variable difference on old/new cards - my 7970 is also just shy of 600Kh/s; haven't tested on anything older though. I'm 'losing' maybe 10-20% in comparison to standard scrypt.

Looks like I need to look into namecoin a bit deeper!

Reading yet another issue with a certificate authority recently (in this case, a French agency being able to masquerade as Google for a MITM attack: http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/12/french-agency-caught-minting-ssl-certificates-impersonating-google/), I thought about suitable alternatives for protecting privacy and ensuring validity, perhaps in a similar aspect to namecoin.

Essentially, the network itself can act as the Web of Trust; all the clients can have all the knowledge of every 'registered' (tbd) site, existing transaction histories serve instead to validate the domain/site has not been transferred to another party, and nobody can sweet-talk/hack a company into providing an illegitimate certificate.

Before I start contemplating the idea too deeply, is there general interest/critical flaws in regards to this? I can think of quite a few issues without thinking too much:

• Must start centralized until the network can 'self-sustain' itself to authenticate addresses (so like a master database - which then stands a chance of being exploited)
• MITM attacks against the authentication process itself - keep using certificates for some things?? In which case, what's the point of this
• Non-instant resolution; certificate setups can just query with the CA and check against a CRL - our method would require the network to respond before ascertaining the result. I guess the OS could be preemptive and download in advance, and clients (i.e. web browsers) query with the OS - but still far from perfect
• And perhaps most importantly - how can the coin correlate to 'earnings' - a coin per 'domain'? Little to no value in doing something like that though. Has to be an incentive; maybe providing a different coin - but that then has a whole host of other issues!

Interested to hear your opinions And feel free to tell me the idea actually sucks 

+1

Or +100 if I can.

Another new QRK miner/wallet user - appreciate if someone can do a test donation! 

QRK: Qb62fKE7s9qMSS9Nkbm3Xk58VBmxU4PGh3

I'll be incredibly cheeky and ask if my existing 4.8 million rosetta credits can have 'back-payment'

(I know there's no way to verify, and this coin doesn't work like that, but hey, gotta try!)

Just stopped using BOINC to try and actually earn some money for the contributions, mining litecoins at the moment; but am interested in this coin, because as others have stated - it encourages actually providing something back to the real world at the same time.

Has there been any potential discussion with any BOINC project owners for any additional potential integration or collaboration?

The Core i7 in my Alienware would disagree with you in regards to the overheating element, although that is obviously not a common scenario

I have it running on 2 threads (every little helps), and it stays below 80 degrees most of the time. If I tried 4 or 6 threads, I'd probably reach 85-100, and 8 would probably force a shutdown. The 7970m running at the same time probably doesn't help...

My VERY old laptop, for kicks, I also have mining litecoin. It's useless for any real-world usage (I think the disk is near-death), but the CPU still runs fine - a Turion TL-52, which is a shame to waste. It's currently putting out a little over 2 kh/s, which is pathetic - you definitely want to target a CPU-only coin, like Primecoin, as previously mentioned by others.

Have to say I agree - there's no need for any additional alt-coins unless they bring something useful and innovative along with them (like namecoin, for example) - you'll be doomed to obscurity otherwise.