What happens to the coins for sha-256 mining after CC2.0 launches will they become part of the pool for folding payouts?
There's a few possible directions--since things like the price and people's beliefs about future market performance are based largely on the mintage rate, it isn't something we want to mess with too much. On the surface, there are three major options:
Roll the SHA-256 allocation of coin mintage into folding rewards (best choice)This would allow 9,360 coins to be paid out per day to people doing folding and other similar computational science computations in the future. This seems like the best way to express Curecoin's priority of research and encourage additional resources to be pointed at scientific computing networks.
Roll the SHA-256 allocation of coin mintage into PoS rewardsThis would encourage people to hold the coin, and would (theoretically) lower sell pressure, at least in a short-term frame. However, adding a set-number of coins to a PoS scheme would require a decaying curve of some form to reduce PoS percentage-based rewards over time to keep the awarded amount per day at a given level, and even that requires (fairly impossible) accurate prediction of the percentage of the network that will be staking coins at all points through the coin's lifespan. Assuming the technical difficulties of implementing this could be overcome, it's basically trickle-down economics, hoping that rewarding those holding the coin will increase the value of the coin by increasing buy pressure and decreasing sell pressure will eventually benefit those actually serving Curecoin's purpose of scientific research.
Eliminate the SHA-256 allocation of coin mintageCut the ~1872 coins/day rewarded to SHA256 miners out of the equation, reducing the daily coin mintage, and rewarding early purchasers of Curecoin by increasing their proportional holdings of the network over time.
To summarize internal discussions, option 1 is a pretty clear winner. It keeps the mintage schedule on-par with what anyone financially invested into the coin expects, and rewards folding users directly. The SHA256 coins were originally there simply to encourage network security, and won't be a requirement in 2.0.
Option #2 (rolling into PoS) is not only difficult to do reliably, and has less of an effect on the overall returns from folding which a direct reward system (#1) offers.
Option #3 steers Curecoin away from the expected mintage schedule.
We're of course open to discussion on the above--perhaps someone has insight on something we missed or underestimated. In 2.0, we'll likely reduce the PoS rewards, as the current PoS reward percentage isn't realistic for a long-term coin to sustain, and will cause the network to become unbalanced in the future towards stake-holders. Additionally, since much less of 2.0's security relies on PoS, the reward to users for keeping coins online and active should be lowered accordingly. As it stands, Curecoin allows approximately 1% interest per month on coins (See
https://chainz.cryptoid.info/cure/tx.dws?5844462cf21932952abd050a97ea731e295e1ad05eab8c0e0a5fb047cdcacfb7.htm, which is a PoS block minted a tad after the 30-day mark, and shows a bit above 1% interest), making Curecoin effectively around 12.6825% per year. It would take around 5 years and 10 months to double a 24/7-staked Curecoin wallet. In the real world, a
guaranteed return of 12.6825%/year is unheard of. This causes people to play "hot potato" with the coins if it isn't staking, as the per-coin value would cut in half every 5 years and 10 months, all other constants in a perfectly-reactive 24/7 staking currency held the same. It served us well until now, and will continue to serve us in the coming months, but as a long-term solution it is impractical for any store of value, and would make nearly any kind of investment OF Curecoin into nearly any venture pointless, as the venture would be spending Curecoin and thus not receiving PoS returns, and would have to generate 12.6825% organically.
Doesn't work.
