Bitcoin Forum
December 17, 2017, 01:10:08 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 [134] 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 ... 221 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN]CureCoin - CURECOIN TEAM HAS TAKEN RANK 1 ON FOLDING@HOME!!!  (Read 668213 times)
kingscrown
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672


http://fuk.io - check it out!


View Profile WWW
October 02, 2014, 03:53:41 AM
 #2661

seems the coin is dying. it had decent idea but somehow peopel dint follow.
real sham as this oculd help many lives Sad

1513473008
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513473008

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513473008
Reply with quote  #2

1513473008
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
October 02, 2014, 04:52:07 AM
 #2662

seems the coin is dying. it had decent idea but somehow peopel dint follow.
real sham as this oculd help many lives Sad

It seems that the people that actually fold is a very small group.  I thought this would bring new people in and it did but I don't think a lot of people that had never folded before actually stuck around.

In all honesty I'm not sure how much longer I'll continue to fold.  My reasons have nothing to do with Curecoin though.  It has to do with the fact that folding on my hardware has been a non-stop battle since I started.  When I finally got Core 17's running smoothly Stanford broke out the Core 16's again which causes my machines to crash constantly so the battle started all over again.

I've been to the F@H forum and posted a couple of times.  Members of the forum do try to help but I find the support from the "support" team to be lacking in many ways.  Obvious things that would improve the user experience are clearly of no interest to them which is getting on my nerves to say the least.  It seems they have more of an interest in getting people to go away then they do with improving things.  So I'll probably oblige them soon.

If new people ran into a fraction of the problems I ran into I honestly can't say I blame them for moving on though.  Most people don't have the time to keep fighting the issues that come up.  Neither do I.

  
pallas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


Black Belt Developer


View Profile
October 02, 2014, 09:46:32 AM
 #2663

is the block explorer down? it says "coucou".

bump...

Luschtiha
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12


View Profile
October 02, 2014, 09:47:46 AM
 #2664

How many people are mining Btc and alt's?

I think there are enough who are folding:
http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/team_list.php?s=

Curecoin had a output of 4,012,966,688 points in May!
These people where not only "new" folding miners, some were for sure people of other teams, but they are all back in their old teams and the miners are looking at the current price........ Embarrassed
22naru
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 507


TaaS is a closed-end fund designated to blockchain


View Profile WWW
October 02, 2014, 12:56:01 PM
 #2665

i still folding  so... i'm a believer in CC team and what they can do. keep F@H Smiley




▄▄▄                                          ███                ▄▄▄     ███
███                                          ███               ▐███▌    ███
███                                          ███                ▀▀▀     ███
███        ▄███████▄   ▐███▄█████▄     ▄▄███████ ▄▄███████▄▄    ███   ███████▄
███       ████▀  ████  ▐████▀▀████▌   ████▀▀██▀▄████▀▀▀▀▀███▌   ███   ▀▀███▀▀▀
███      ▐████▄▄▄████  ▐███    ███▌  ████    ▄████▀▄█▌   ▐███   ███     ███
███      ▐███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▐███    ███▌  ███▌   ████▀▄███▀   ▐███   ███     ███
███       ████▄    ▄▄  ▐███    ███▌  ████▄   ▄█████▀▄█   ████   ███     ███▄ ▄▄
▀████████  ▀████████▀  ▐███    ███▌   █████████▀▀  ████████▀    ███     ▀█████▀

ALL YOU NEED IS LOAN





















           ▄▄██████▄▄
       ▄▄██████████████▄▄
    ▄▄████████████████████▄▄
 ▄████████████████████████████▄
████████████▌  █████████████████
████████████▌  █████████████████
███████▀▀      ███▀      ▀██████
██████   ▄██▄▄▀▀  ▄▄▄██▄   █████
█████▌  ████    ▄▀  ████   █████
█████▌  ▐███▄▄▀▀  ▄▄████   █████
██████   ▀▀▀   ▄▄█▀  ▀▀   ▄█████
████████▄▄▄▄███████▄▄▄▄▄████████
▀██████████████████████████████▀
   ▀▀███████████████████████▀▀
      ▀▀████████████████▀▀
          ▀▀▀██████▀▀▀
Vorksholk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile WWW
October 02, 2014, 09:46:04 PM
 #2666

Hey Curecoin, let's work together?

.  ethical coins unite ..., let's join forces for specific projects.

Do you have a specific project that relates to science and are looking for a support partner, if so call on Einsteinium we will do what we can to forward your project.   

Support partners usually will pledge to retweet, provide comments, likes, small donations, and endorsements for specific events they choose to get involved with.

Einsteinium is a 'cause coin' we seek to provide funding for science endeavors, we are seeking project partners for small projects involving: educational science. science fairs, science instructors (teachers, professors, mentors, etc ...), or anything else that has a heavy science influence.



Ebola is topical subject, EMC2 is considering making a public donation, we need to know if you are willing to join our campaign if we carry it forward?



What kind of participation are you looking for? Smiley

How many people are mining Btc and alt's?

I think there are enough who are folding:
http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/team_list.php?s=

Curecoin had a output of 4,012,966,688 points in May!
These people where not only "new" folding miners, some were for sure people of other teams, but they are all back in their old teams and the miners are looking at the current price........ Embarrassed


Quite a few people are still folding, we're nearly double the daily production of our closest competitor! Smiley

seems the coin is dying. it had decent idea but somehow peopel dint follow.
real sham as this oculd help many lives Sad

It's not dying, we're in a lull period while writing extensive amounts of code for cc2.0/3.0.

is the block explorer down? it says "coucou".

Certainly seems to be down, that block explorer seems to have had some problems lately. Curecoin 3.0 will have a built-in block explorer.

The graph of curecoin value is pretty disheartening. Essentially no upward movement for its entire life....yet I keep buying more and folding because I believe in the cause. Can anyone give some reasons why the downward movement won't continue? Any big plans that will increase the value long-term?

As a pretty vocal supporter of Curecoin I really wish I could say I'm aware of plans that will increase the long-term value of the coin, but sadly I'm not aware of any.  CC 2.0 is certainly an improvement, but unless universities literally get behind CC 2.0 I'm still not sure where the value will come from.

Additionally, it doesn't appear that the folding community is large enough to build an economy themselves such as with Dogecoin.

I'm no economist and can't make any predictions about future price with any kind of certainty (hey, it's crypto!), but one of the roadblocks to the next generation of Curecoin is getting universities to integrate certificate signing into their existing computational research projects. We're working on making sure this integration is as easy and faultless as possible, which should ease any University's resistance towards implementing Curecoin into their work. Value is certainly an odd concept in cryptocurrency, and no one is entirely sure where value for any coin truly comes from. Some of it comes from speculation, some from utility, some from blind diversification, some from market manipulation, and some seems to materialize out of thin air. The hope is that the utility of Curecoin will push it to a higher valuation--it will offer similar utility to existing cryptocurrencies, and will have a signing algorithm which is resistant to Quantum Computers, unlike Bitcoin/Litecoin/Peercoin/Dogecoin...etc's ECDSA. Additionally, it is a significantly cleaner alternative to traditional mining--all computational power pointed towards generating coins is doing valuable computational research, and the relationship with university research facilities will hopefully increase the public image and set it aside from the black-market-related image that most major cryptocurrencies have been unfortunately shaded with.

In addition to programming, the team is working with media contacts to further Curecoin's media exposure, though this has proven to be a lengthy process.



Fold Proteins, earn cryptos! CureCoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603757.0
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
October 03, 2014, 03:11:47 AM
 #2667

The graph of curecoin value is pretty disheartening. Essentially no upward movement for its entire life....yet I keep buying more and folding because I believe in the cause. Can anyone give some reasons why the downward movement won't continue? Any big plans that will increase the value long-term?

As a pretty vocal supporter of Curecoin I really wish I could say I'm aware of plans that will increase the long-term value of the coin, but sadly I'm not aware of any.  CC 2.0 is certainly an improvement, but unless universities literally get behind CC 2.0 I'm still not sure where the value will come from.

Additionally, it doesn't appear that the folding community is large enough to build an economy themselves such as with Dogecoin.

I'm no economist and can't make any predictions about future price with any kind of certainty (hey, it's crypto!), but one of the roadblocks to the next generation of Curecoin is getting universities to integrate certificate signing into their existing computational research projects. We're working on making sure this integration is as easy and faultless as possible, which should ease any University's resistance towards implementing Curecoin into their work. Value is certainly an odd concept in cryptocurrency, and no one is entirely sure where value for any coin truly comes from. Some of it comes from speculation, some from utility, some from blind diversification, some from market manipulation, and some seems to materialize out of thin air. The hope is that the utility of Curecoin will push it to a higher valuation--it will offer similar utility to existing cryptocurrencies, and will have a signing algorithm which is resistant to Quantum Computers, unlike Bitcoin/Litecoin/Peercoin/Dogecoin...etc's ECDSA. Additionally, it is a significantly cleaner alternative to traditional mining--all computational power pointed towards generating coins is doing valuable computational research, and the relationship with university research facilities will hopefully increase the public image and set it aside from the black-market-related image that most major cryptocurrencies have been unfortunately shaded with.

In addition to programming, the team is working with media contacts to further Curecoin's media exposure, though this has proven to be a lengthy process.

I'm certainly not an economist either, but I suspect value / demand of any crypto is probably going to boil down to what you can do with it over others and the community.  I'm seeing things like credit cards backed by crypto's being talked about, acceptance by payment processors like PayPal, etc.  Ideally we would get universities that sign the certificates to also allow people to use CC at their universities for tuition, buying books, etc.  Actual utility that people would find valuable.

Unfortunately I don't have the experience to even pursue such ideas, not to mention my second full time job is trying to keep my computers running.  UGH.

IMO, I do not think a crypto can survive if it's main purpose is to be traded on exchanges.  I hope resistance to quantum computers is a feature that people will feel is important enough for adoption over other coins but honestly until you guys mentioned it, I didn't even know it was a threat.  Curecoin is clearly much more productive in use of energy.  No doubt about it, but there are other coins pursuing energy efficient methods as well.  For instance, Gridcoin is going through a complete redesign so that CPU's and GPU's all go toward research (95% overall).  Who knows how that will turn out but there is progress on a number of fronts.

I think what we are doing to earn curecoins is a huge selling point but I don't know how to leverage that into adoption / acceptance by payment processors.

I hope I'm not sounding harsh.  I know you guys are working as hard as you can and CC2.0 is a huge improvement, but utility has been a concern of mine for some time.  I haven't seen much mentioned about it.
beitris.dwlul
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
October 03, 2014, 03:43:35 AM
 #2668

 this coin is almost dead now   Sad

natmccoy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 880

twitter.com/natmcmolecule


View Profile
October 03, 2014, 04:26:40 AM
 #2669

this coin is almost dead now   Sad

Did you not read the Dev's lengthy and encouraging response right above you? There is a lot of volume right now (sure, more selling than buying), Curecoin folders are contributing a large portion of the F@H work being done, and the dev is actively coding an upgraded and exciting new version of the coin. Besides, we are still at 4,000 satoshi. Your lazy, pessimistic comment contributes very little  Angry

Anyway, thanks for the great response Vorksholk.

& to ChasingTheDream, I agree what you have to say about utility, even if we just got a labcoat company or an online chemistry supply business to accept the coin it would be a start. If even one university accepted curecoin for tuition that would be huge!

ChristianVirtual
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 71


View Profile
October 03, 2014, 09:47:55 AM
 #2670

...a signing algorithm which is resistant to Quantum Computers ...

I keep reading it, but also keep not understanding it. Is this relevant for today's implementations ? Google seems to have something like an QC in the corner, NSA maybe too.

Having it conceptual in mind is good, but need to spend efforts on it ? Can it be tested/validated ? Does it scares people off as techie-talk ?

But again, I keep not understanding it. Can you explain it in simple terms to me ?
Vorksholk
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile WWW
October 04, 2014, 03:34:22 AM
 #2671

...a signing algorithm which is resistant to Quantum Computers ...

I keep reading it, but also keep not understanding it. Is this relevant for today's implementations ? Google seems to have something like an QC in the corner, NSA maybe too.

Having it conceptual in mind is good, but need to spend efforts on it ? Can it be tested/validated ? Does it scares people off as techie-talk ?

But again, I keep not understanding it. Can you explain it in simple terms to me ?

Basically, modern signature schemes are based off of the multiplication of large prime numbers, and Shor's algorithm allows quantum computers to find the prime factorization of large numbers. Shor's algorithm requires a quantum computer to run, and thus factoring large numbers into their source prime numbers becomes practical.

I'll give an example of RSA because it's much more straight-forward, but keep in mind a similar issue exists in a more complex form inside of ECDSA. (The following steps are information-only, you can skip them if you wish. If you want an example of creating/breaking an RSA key, you're in the right place. Summary at the bottom!)
Code:
For public/private key cryptography, you need to generate a private key, and from this private key you can create or derive your public key. In the case of RSA, you generate a public key in the following manner:
1.) Choose two unique, large prime numbers. (p and q)
2.) Multiply these unique primes together (result = n)
3.) Compute: (p-1)*(q-1) (result = φ)
4.) Pick an integer between 1 and φ which doesn't share a prime factor with φ (result = e)
5.) Figure out what number (d) when multiplied by (e/φ) gives 1. In other words, the remainder of (d*e)/φ is 1.

So, let's do an example! :)
1.) My two primes (obviously waaaay to small to ever be practical for actual cryptography): p=7 and q=13
2.) Multiply them(n=91)
3.) Multiply (p-1) with (q-1): (6*12)φ=72
4.) Pick an integer sharing no prime factor with φ:e=11
5.) Number which when multiplied by (e/φ) gives us a remainder of one:d=51
-->Check: d*(e/φ)=649/72=9 + 1/72 or 9 remainder 1. YAY!

Now, your public key is the two numbers 'e' and 'n', so our public key is (11, 91).
Your private key is the two numbers 'd' and 'n', so our private key is (51, 91).

Now, of course these numbers are ridiculously small and not practical for encryption, but let's demonstrate breaking this simple RSA key given the availability of a 'function' B(x) which, when fed a number, would return the prime factorization. Example: B(391) returns two numbers: 17 and 23. THIS FUNCTION B(x) is what quantum computers would provide.

Given only the public key, we have two variables initially:
e = 11
n = 91
As you can see above, if we could calculate both p and q (the initial starting prime numbers), we could re-calculate the private key d. Given the starting primes, finding 'd' is deterministic. So, our only goal here is to calculate p and q. We already know pq, and we know p and q are both primes. To this effect, calling B(n) or B(91) yields {7, 13}. However, if we were unable to easily find the prime factorization of 91, we would be stuck brute-forcing:
2*x=91 (x not integer)
3*x=91 (x not integer)
5*x=91 (x not integer)
7*x=91 (x is an integer)
For very large values of  n, brute-forcing becomes computationally-infeasible. Another means of attacking RSA keys is the number field sieve, which is significantly more effective, and was used to crack a 768-bit RSA key. For a key of size 3072-bit, it would take all the computing power on Earth today longer (by orders of magnitude) than the age of the known universe to factor this number 'e' back into parts 'p' and 'q'.

Or, with a quantum computer of large enough (around 6144 'qubits' or quantum bits, a unit of quantum information which can exist in a superposition where it is both 1 AND 0), you'd just use Shor's algorithm (which has been demonstrated in factoring '15' into '3' and '5' (not impressive in itself of course, but the technology exists and Shor's algorithm is provably feasible) to call B(n).

Summary: RSA is vulnerable to quantum computers. A component of the public RSA key (n) is simply the product of two very large prime numbers. The infeasibility of factoring n into the two original primes p and q is an essential property of RSA's integrity. If a method were created which, when given a number, was able to efficiently calculate the prime factorization, it would break RSA. Shor's algorithm can factor extremely large numbers into a prime factorization in a practical timeframe. If quantum computers were stable and were scalable to a desired size, Shor's algorithm would be able to factor an RSA public key to an RSA private key.

Bitcoin doesn't use RSA, it uses ECDSA. However, Shor's 2nd algorithm from 1994 allows for solving discrete logarithms could attack ECDSA. Additionally, a smaller quantum computer would be required to attack a classically-similar security of ECDSA than for RSA (Breaking a 2048-bit RSA key needs around 4096 qubits, breaking a 224-bit ECDSA key would need somewhere between 1300 and 1600 qubits). If you're interested in reading a very dense document on quantum computers applied to Elliptical Curve Crypto, check out http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0301141v2.pdf.

One of Shor's proposed algorithms from 1994 allows for quantum computers to "easily" solve discrete logarithms. So, what does this mean? (You can skip this section as well)

Code:
The discrete logarithm problem is another mathematical entity believed to be easy one way, hard the other.
For example:
q^b mod n ≡ x
Where n is a primitive root of q (basically, for all possible values of r, the chances of getting any result (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) from (q^b MOD n) is equal)
Solve for x.
Knowing n, q, and b, this can be calculated very easily. Let's say n = 13. 6 is a primitive root.
How we know 6 is a primitive root of 13:
6^1 MOD 13 = 6
6^2 MOD 13 = 10
6^3 MOD 13 = 8
6^4 MOD 13 = 9
6^5 MOD 13 = 2
6^6 MOD 13 = 12
6^7 MOD 13 = 7
6^8 MOD 13 = 3
6^9 MOD 13 = 5
6^10 MOD 13 = 4
6^11 MOD 13 = 11
6^12 MOD 13 = 1
6^13 MOD 13 = 6
6^14 MOD 13 = 10
6^15 MOD 13 = 8
etc... You can see a pattern. 6^1 MOD 13 is the same as 6^13 MOD 13 is the same as 6^25 MOD 13 is the same as 6^37 MOD 13. Using this looping pattern, we can predict 6^1994833 MOD 6 as being 6. Why? Because (1994833-1)/12 is an integer. We don't have to calculate 6^1994833, we just use a pattern. Cool, huh? 6^1994834 MOD 13 is 10. 6^1994835 MOD 13 is 8. Etc. Not really important to what we're doing right now, it's just awesome. :D

Aaaanyhow, back to what we were doing.
 q^b mod n ≡ x
Let's set q as 6, n as 13, and b as 119. We could either use our pattern above or resort to asking a calculator, but x is easy to calculate. x = 11.
That's easy. Now, try calculating:
6^b mod 13 = 119.
For such a small modulus 13, this problem is trivial trial-and error. However, this problem becomes far more difficult with extremely large moduli, similar to a prime factorization.

So, let's summarize what we know so far.
Bitcoin uses ECDSA
ECDSA relies on the hardness of Discrete Logarithms.
Discrete Logarithms can be easily solved by an algorithm by Peter Shor on quantum computational devices.

So, if quantum computers can break ECDSA, how vulnerable is Bitcoin?



The above image explains the basic process for generating a Bitcoin address. The address itself cannot be reversed to the public key of the ECDSA keypair, because it is protected by a hash. However, when you create and sign a transaction (spend Bitcoins, namely), your public key is revealed. Peers re-calculate your address based on the public key you revealed to the network, and if the produced address matches the source address, and the signature matches the public key, the transaction is accepted.

So, coins sent to a Bitcoin address that has never sent a transaction can not be spent by someone with a Quantum computer. However, any address on the Bitcoin network that has previously made a transaction can be reversed to its private key, and an attacker can then empty the address.

As such, Bitcoin addresses would have to be one-time-use, which isn't exactly practical.

No quantum computers are available today which can crack ECDSA. Nor will they be here next year.

Quantum-resistant signing algorithms are proven effective. They rely only on the existence of a hashing function that is one-way by design, which is fulfilled perfectly fine by SHA256, SHA3, RIPE160, Grostel, etc. etc. Quantum computers can't brute-force deterministic circuit-logic operations in a cost-effective manner.

Hopefully that all made sense, I didn't expect to write a novella >.> Let me know if you have any other questions!

Fold Proteins, earn cryptos! CureCoin.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=603757.0
natmccoy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 880

twitter.com/natmcmolecule


View Profile
October 05, 2014, 12:54:31 AM
 #2672

So the market cap is currently at $16,000, granted that is somewhat due to the recent decline in bitcoin value, but at some point it has got to be worth investing in. Currently $160 gets you a 1% stake in the project. I've been dribbling in orders as the price declined, but it's getting to the point where this project is undervalued. How much lower can the price get?


ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
October 05, 2014, 06:15:28 PM
 #2673

@Vorksholk

Thanks for the detailed information on quantum computer resistance!  My concern is that you guys could be so far ahead of the actual threat that nobody is going to care.  I also don't know how much additional work you are looking at for this specific implementation.  Maybe it isn't much more work than you was going to have to do anyway for the certificate signing so it makes sense to do it now.  I just hope it isn't adding months to the project at this point.

So the market cap is currently at $16,000, granted that is somewhat due to the recent decline in bitcoin value, but at some point it has got to be worth investing in. Currently $160 gets you a 1% stake in the project. I've been dribbling in orders as the price declined, but it's getting to the point where this project is undervalued. How much lower can the price get?

Well price is the equilibrium point between supply and demand right?  So we know the supply, but what about demand?  My concern all along has been what do we do with Curecoins?  If the main use of Curecoin is to sell them on exchanges for other coins that we can actually use then Curecoins price is going to remain under pressure.

Building usage around a crypto coin is a lot of work and it obviously takes a lot of people.  It needs a large community.  I think we've got 15-20 active posters in the forum, who knows how many readers.  There appear to be even less on the main http://www.curecoin.us/ forum and our reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/curecoin/).  We obviously have a lot more folders than that but they don't appear to be active in the community.  So where is the ability to use the coin going to come from?  Who is going to build it?

We could push to get accepted by payment processors but from what I've seen so far only the highest volume coins have made it.  Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Dogecoin.

So even after CC2.0 comes out we still have quite a challenge ahead of us.

Additionally, it appears that at least one of the more well establish coins have figured out that some of us like to fold and mining isn't viable for many people.  For instance, the Dogecoin community is gathering donations to reward folders in Dogecoin.  I can't help but wonder if we would be better off trying to embrace an existing established coin rather than trying to build a new coin from scratch and the Dogecoin community would seem to be a good candidate to at least have the discussion IMO.

I know trying to get involved with an existing coin is a whole other can of worms but it may be easier to get involved with a coin that has an existing economy than trying to build one from scratch for a new coin.

Just my thoughts.
pallas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498


Black Belt Developer


View Profile
October 05, 2014, 07:56:08 PM
 #2674

I believe that the coin aim is to replace the useless mining of the other coins with useful computation.
In this regard, the dogecoin effort doesn't deliver, nor does the current curecoin implementation.
But version 2 will, so I am really looking forward to it!
Let's hope people will understand the importance of this aspect of cryptocurrencies.

ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
October 05, 2014, 08:39:24 PM
 #2675

I believe that the coin aim is to replace the useless mining of the other coins with useful computation.
In this regard, the dogecoin effort doesn't deliver, nor does the current curecoin implementation.
But version 2 will, so I am really looking forward to it!
Let's hope people will understand the importance of this aspect of cryptocurrencies.

Yep, I completely agree.  The wasted energy and the actual release of Curecoin is why I stopped mining Dogecoin myself.  Without usage of the coin though Curecoin is in a tough spot.

I'm a believer in research based crypto.  I have no idea what that will ultimately look like in a few years with the various progressions but I do believe the two concepts are perfect for each other.

Of course there would be other difficult problems with "attaching" to another coin as well such as what would be done with the existing coins that we already have.  So I suspect any possibility of doing that is already too late.
ChristianVirtual
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 71


View Profile
October 05, 2014, 10:37:09 PM
 #2676

Hopefully that all made sense, I didn't expect to write a novella >.> Let me know if you have any other questions!

Dear Vorksholk,

It starts to makes sense in my brain ... Thank you very much for your time and "executive summary", much appreciated.

I_AM_AT_WORK_NOW_
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17


View Profile
October 07, 2014, 06:00:21 AM
 #2677

is the block explorer down? it says "coucou".

bump...

yes it's gone, been gone for a while.

Qadh8Hdn95sm584cfvo6RnAqw3XK6Rjhx9
203.217.21.124
Indigoman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6


View Profile
October 09, 2014, 07:04:01 PM
 #2678


4.) There will be a limited amount of coins that can be minted using certificate mining (however this will be stretched out over a very long period of time, and will be practical for encouraging computational research far into the future). If we implement a Proof-Of-Stake model, then we will see some form of interest, which will be rate-limited, but not limited to an actual final quantity. Hopefully that makes sense, let me know if you'd like me to clarify that one.


Thank you for your answers. I have some follow up questions regarding this point.

Why put a limit on the amount of coin to be minted using the certificate mining? I understand it will be stretch over a very long time but why have the limit in the first place? Why not  make it rate-limited somehow without a limited final quantity? Having it finite means that there will be a point in time in the future that would deem certificate mining unprofitable and people, being financially incentivized, will move from it to more profitable venues. Be it 10 days from now or 10 million years from now, that point in time will come and people will move away. Could you please elaborate more on the decisions to set a limit on coin mined with certificate mining and the thought process behind them ?

Thank you

Yeah, this part isn't actually set in stone, so if other people have input on this, don't be shy! Had a discussion with Cygnus and Cujo about this last night. Smiley

I'm thinking the best path might be a compromise between people wanting a set-limit system and an actual currency's behavior. Bitcoin and almost every other cryptocurrency has some finite limit to it's mintage, attractive to investors as it is scarce, similar to a commodity. On the other side, fiat currencies are designed in such a way that their mintage is based on a lot of factors including population, and tend to become less valuable over time, per unit. As a result, a compromise would be a very long mintage schedule with an extremely gradual decline, so the coin is still generated at a predictable rate, but is still limited in supply in a given period of time.

Just my 2 cents...  I do think a coin that follows a very small inflationary model is a good idea but only to the extent that it is slightly higher than what is needed to offset coins that will get lost via people losing interest, losing their hard drive with no backups, or forgetting their pass phrase etc.  I have no idea how to estimate what the natural deflation rate is but I wouldn't want to see growth being much higher than the best guess.  

My biggest concern as I've mentioned before is coin utilization.  If we don't find ways to actually use CureCoin, the coin is going to die no matter what its features.  People need to be able to use it and right now there is nothing to use it for.  That is the number one problem in my view.  Of course we can use it for speculation but that can be done with a thousand other coins as well.  We need real uses for CureCoin.

Maybe when CC 2.0 is released the devs can approach Moolah and others to see if they have an interest in working with the coin.  It would seem to fit in well with their mindset and could possibly bring in the Dogecoin community, but I don't think they would be interested under the current structure.  CC 2.0 should alleviate many concerns that would come up.  I would love to find a way to introduce CureCoin to the Dogecoin crowd.  Most members of the Dogecoin community can't mine anymore since the implementation of AuxPoW due to the soaring difficultly.  It would be nice to get a few over here and create a cross community if possible.  If we could find a way to tap into the DOGE community I think CureCoin's demand would skyrocket.

It appears I have veered off topic a bit from the original quote so I guess I put in 4 cents instead of my 2 cents.   Grin

I've been away for a while so this is a little late lol but here goes.

I completely agree that a well established currency that's used for daily transactions should NOT be deflationary. It should have an inflation that is organic and healthy for the growth of developing economies. I did some random readings on the topic and it  appears that an inflation rate between %1 and %3 correlates with healthy growing economies in developing countries ( curecoin is an economic ecosystem that will represent a digital form of a growing developing country) .. Therefore I highly highly HIGHLY discourage setting a hard limit on the supply. Give it an inflationary nature that reaches that optimum inflation rate between 1-3% that takes into account transaction fees are destroyed to balance the inflation. Economically speaking, this is the way to go. The Bitcoin simulation of precious metals and deflationary nature of it while exciting at first, it fails to be a medium of exchange for daily transactions due to the hoarding nature it has by the idea that the Bitcoin I hold today will be worth more tomorrow since there will be less to mine. It discourages economical growth on the long run by promoting hoarding and discouraging transacting in it.

Speaking of transacting and encouraging it, I've read that a healthy economy grows healthier with increased amount of transactions that occur in it. Therefore a model that encourages spending and discourages hoarding would be optimal. The REDDCOIN team have attempted to tackle that aspect and came in with Proof Of Stak Velocity ( POSV) . I invite the debs to read the REDDCOIN white paper and explore the possible use of a POSV model rather than POS or proof of capacity along side the proof of certificate Smiley

On another random note , I had lost the link to http://curecoinfolding.com/progress-updates-p2p-networking/ then I realized it's not on the curecoin.net website. I really think a link to the curecoinfolding.com website should be on the curecoin.net as I never really knew about that site until and accidently came by it.

Indigoman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6


View Profile
October 09, 2014, 07:26:11 PM
 #2679

Marketing and creating usability for the coin will become top prioirty AFTER the implementation of the system. I see GREAT potential! For example, curecoin would require/encourage universities that want to apply as a signing authority to accept curecoin on campus for tuition and other stuff. Why would they do that? Cause it'll encourage more people to do proof of certificate work which will the help the university's research further develop. Not to mention the amazing PR the university would get for accepting a humane crypto currency. I know it's frustrating now with the price guys but once the system is implemented, the uses would endless. Heck we could create a fork of some sort that "rents out" computational power to private companies by giving them signing authority for a fee or a donation that could require the fee to paid only in curecoin and for a limited period of time for example. You know how much potential income could be generated by renting computational power ?? Great potential .. See what's coming not what's under your feet guys Wink
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
October 10, 2014, 01:28:30 AM
 #2680

Just for the record I would like to recant my mention of Moolah from my message quoted by Indigoman.   Angry  Since they have taken over MintPal, let's just say that I won't be doing business with them unless there is a radical improvement in their customer service.  So please ignore that part of my message.  There are plenty of other payment processors.

Regarding the inflation rate, I've also seen 1-3% used quite a bit.  My feeling would be closer to 1% but it is just a guess.
Pages: « 1 ... 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 [134] 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 ... 221 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!