[ANN] CureCoin 2.0 is live - Mandatory Update is available now - DEC 2018

[cryptogasm]

Hey everyone, quick update on Curecoin 2.0:

We've gone through 8 internal iterations, fixed a lot of bugs/issues (radix tree for the ledger sometimes didn't return the correct hash when climbing back down a fork, clients had a difficult time forking back >~100 blocks, communication protocol wasn't expressive enough for handling certain network conditions, etc.). Still chasing a bug with clients getting desynchronized, so I'm working on an overhaul of the networking code.

Curecoin to the moon!! Sell walls thinning. This time it looks like we can easily break 10K sats!!

GO GO CURE!! 

[dollarmoney]

hi,

link for wallet update?

[neguinho]

Mining where
 

[bardacuda]

Get an up to date version of Curecoin here https://github.com/cygnusxi/CurecoinSource/releases
Android and iOS mobile wallet with multicoin support https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.coinpayments.coinpaymentsapp

CureCoin Homepage
http://curecoin.net/

CureCoin Forum
http://curecoin.net/forum/

Where do I start?
Sourecode:
https://github.com/cygnusxi/CurecoinSource

Pools
Mining pool : http://ispace.co.uk/coindetails/?coin=cure
Mining pool : http://cure.hardcoreminers.com
Mining pool : http://cure.cryptopools.com/

Folding pool: https://www.cryptobullionpools.com
Folding getting-started guide: https://www.curecoin.net/index.php/knowledge-base/12-knowledge-base/folding-for-curecoin/23-how-do-i-start-folding-for-curecoin
Forum: https://www.curecoin.net/forum/
IRC Channel: webchat.freenode.net Channel: ##curecoin Please use #curecoin now

Block Explorers: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/cure/

Current version of the wallet is 1.3.4

[K0b1]

Hey everyone, quick update on Curecoin 2.0:

We've gone through 8 internal iterations, fixed a lot of bugs/issues (radix tree for the ledger sometimes didn't return the correct hash when climbing back down a fork, clients had a difficult time forking back >~100 blocks, communication protocol wasn't expressive enough for handling certain network conditions, etc.). Still chasing a bug with clients getting desynchronized, so I'm working on an overhaul of the networking code.

Curecoin to the moon!! Sell walls thinning. This time it looks like we can easily break 10K sats!!

GO GO CURE!! 

Now I can believe that more than ever.
Good luck to cure

[QuintLeo]

Whelp GTX 1080 Ti with same number of cores as Titan XP is out for $699 USD. I guess all the talk of 1070 vs 1080 price/perf and ROI is all moot now.

I'm sure that the 1070 fanboys will still come up with some reason why 1070 is "better".  

 Not at CURRENT pricing on the 1080 - it seems to now be the "Sweet spot" given the price PREMIUM everyone is getting for the VERY FEW 1080 ti that are available so far.

 Not that the 1070 is a BAD choice, but with the 1080 at only a $100 or so premium vs the $250 or so premium prior to the 1080ti release the 1080 looks like it's now the winner on all fronts for FAH.


 It does make me wonder why ANYONE would bother buying a Titan any more (unless they NEED the car NOW and can't find an in-stock 1080ti).



 Recent CURE price runup has been nice - but given the current profitability on ETH / ZEC / XMR / others, it needs to hit more like 9000 satoshi just to be CLOSE on profitability (counting FLDC in that) - even with 40M PPD or so having dropped out of CureCoin folding the last 2 weeks (fair sized chunk of that being me).

 (edit - the recent recovery on Bitcoin pricing puts that theshold close to 8000 satoshi - I may be back to hammering CURE in the next day or two.)

[ComputerGenie]

...Recent CURE price runup has been nice - but given the current profitability on ETH / ZEC / XMR / others, it needs to hit more like 9000 satoshi just to be CLOSE on profitability (counting FLDC in that) - even with 40M PPD or so having dropped out of CureCoin folding the last 2 weeks (fair sized chunk of that being me).

I think a lot of that has to do with a combination of whether you look at ROI off the front or back and if you're long or short on BTC.

One thing that would, imo, have a massive impact was if either the CureCoin devs or the FoldingCoin devs worked a deal where the coins were actually spendable with a major hardware reseller. Imagine a world where you could use your CURE/FLDC to directly buy a shiny new 1080Ti, instead of just dumping it on the market.

[QuintLeo]

Whelp GTX 1080 Ti with same number of cores as Titan XP is out for $699 USD. I guess all the talk of 1070 vs 1080 price/perf and ROI is all moot now.

I'm sure that the 1070 fanboys will still come up with some reason why 1070 is "better".  

user foldy on folding forum shared this handy chart

The prices in nvidia store are quite linear:
1080 Ti $700 1100k PPD . 250W
1080 .. $550 . 850k PPD . 180W
1070 .. $400 . 600k PPD . 150W
1060 .. $300 . 350k PPD . 120W
So for each $150 more you get 250k PPD more.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1v5gXral3BcFOoXs5n1M6l_Uo3pZpQYogn6gVlxRPnz0/edit#gid=0

1080ti PPD/W king
970 still PPD/$ king

 Newegg pricing differs a LOT - lowest 1070 (not counting refurbs) is still consistantly $379 (GigaByte ITX and 2 or 3 others on sale at any given point), while 1080s can be had for as low as $479 for non-refurbs.

 The 1070 would still be very competative at the NVidia list pricing (oh yeah, 3'd party 1080ti WHEN YOU CAN FIND ONE is commanding a major price premium in the $850+ range on NewEgg) but at pricing on 3'd party non-Founder cards it's lagging too much to still be the sweet spot.
 IMO NVidia should have dropped the list on the 1070 by $50 or so when they dropped the 1080 by $100, but I guess they're selling as many 1070s as they can make or very close so they don't feel the NEED to be price competative on it (keep in mind that nothing AMD can touch the 1070 OR 1080 for most usage outside of Cryptocoins, except the discontinued FuryX/Nano on a FEW games).

 1080 appears to be the PPD/watt king, 4.7+ vs 4.4 for the 1080 ti and 4.0 for the 1070 - though the 1808ti and Titan X Pascal are no doubt the only contenders for the pure PPD crown.

 1080 and 1070 are almost identical on PPD/$ now at Newegg pricing (1070 still wins at NVidia list pricing), but I think the 1080 might now win by a VERY narrow margin when you factor in total system cost. Add in the higher efficiency and the 1080 is almost definitively the sweet spot now AT REAL WORLD PRICING (keep in mind that the NVIdia store only sells Founder Editions, which are generally the LOWEST performing and hottest running version of each model).

 Good thing I still have my Seasonic x1250 and EVGA 1300 golds around - looks like my next few builds will need them, no way a 3 card build of 1080s is gonna be comfortable on an 850.



 It's too bad EVGA already has their "Bucks" promotion. Might be interesting if the CURE devs could work a deal to replace "bucks" with CURE.
 Perhaps someone should talk to Gigabyte or MSI about a CURE-based competing program.

 I don't see ANY major hardware reseller wanting anything to do with FLDC as long as they continue to insist on using that garbage Counterparty junk.

[ComputerGenie]

...I don't see ANY major hardware reseller wanting anything to do with FLDC as long as they continue to insist on using that garbage Counterparty junk.

There's, literally, not a single sentence in this whole thread that I agree with more than that one. 

[URSAY]

...I don't see ANY major hardware reseller wanting anything to do with FLDC as long as they continue to insist on using that garbage Counterparty junk.

There's, literally, not a single sentence in this whole thread that I agree with more than that one. 

What is it that you don't like about Counterparty?

[Xenophanes0]

By your own figures, you've spent $3200 on the 1070s but $3600 on the 1080s.

 (the $400 and $600 are close enough I'm not going to quibble over the actual pricing, which is a very little less in both cases to go with the lowest-cost cards on Newegg on any given day).

 *HOWEVER* your figure of 800K PPD for a 1080 appears to be HIGHLY optimistic based on the database at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vcVoSVtamcoGj5sFfvKF_XlvuviWWveJIg_iZ8U2bf0/pub?output=html# (I don't have any 1080s so I can't compare based on my own figures), while that 600k figure is in line with my 1070 farm of VERY MILDLY overclocked 1070 cards but very PESSAMISTIC vs the database.

 I think you're trying to make a case here based on BAD DATA.

• The pricing in that comment is using is his figures, not mine

Actually those were your figures. My figures were $550 and $800 CAD respectively (even though it's actually more like $510 vs. $780 for the cheapest dual or triple fan design but I was being conservative). I knew if I used my own figures you would nitpick everything.

@QuintLeo, the difference comes from the fact that you need an extra $400 for the rest of the components of each rig (One really good PSU like an EVGA 1300W G2 and then cheap/used everything else, milk crate or self-built wood/aluminum or whatever for case/chassis etc.). You only need one rig for 6 cards and two rigs for 8. I wanted to use his own example of the worst case for the 1070s where you need to pay for an extra rig and only get 7 or 8 cards to show that even in that worst case and with his overly optimistic 1080 PPD numbers, the 1070s still come out ahead. But of course it's still wrong because FLDC only pays out once a month lol.

But you're completely ignoring the fact that the guy with lower per-rig income would have 50% more of those rigs lol

Now, I'm sure you're still stuck on the "more cards" end of your thought so, remember this...
Cards 7 & 8 will need another full set of hardware to run.

Ignoring the  electric difference (~$15.77 USD per year for *total system* @ $0.01 per kWh):

GTX 1070
Cost: ~$400 USD
PPD: 600,000
FLDC per month: 12,000 - ~$14.72 USD
CURE per month: 787 - ~$35.43 USD
Purchase ROI: ~8 months "raw cost" per card
Yearly Revenue: ~$599 USD

GTX 1080
Cost: ~$600 USD
PPD: 800,000
FLDC per month: 16,000 - ~$19.29 USD
CURE per month: 1050 - ~$47.25 USD
Purchase ROI: ~9 months "raw cost" per card
Yearly Revenue: ~$798 USD

...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

what happened to the other coin they were releasing with curecoin?

they did an alpha or beta release and it went wrong?

What is happening with that coin and when is the snap shot on the cure coin wallet?

It was some quantum resistant new design?

Is it shelved for good or is it still worth holding this cure coins in my wallet awaiting some snapshot date to quality for the new coin?

I have seen no futher mention of it in months now?

I think Vorksholk was waiting on some legal or copyright stuff or something like that but it was more or less finished...that was my understanding anyway.

Thanks for reply I will seek him out and ask him directly again.

crystal clear answers and relevant will be entertained ...

[ComputerGenie]

...I don't see ANY major hardware reseller wanting anything to do with FLDC as long as they continue to insist on using that garbage Counterparty junk.

There's, literally, not a single sentence in this whole thread that I agree with more than that one. 

What is it that you don't like about Counterparty?

• It's frequently down.
• It costs BTC to transfer any other coin
• It's generous to call the exchange "slow"
• ...

[URSAY]

...I don't see ANY major hardware reseller wanting anything to do with FLDC as long as they continue to insist on using that garbage Counterparty junk.

There's, literally, not a single sentence in this whole thread that I agree with more than that one. 

What is it that you don't like about Counterparty?

• It's frequently down.
• It costs BTC to transfer any other coin
• It's generous to call the exchange "slow"
• ...

Thanks for your answer.  I'm only going to counter you once here because this is the CURE thread and I'm not sure how relevant this discussion is.

I haven't experienced Counterparty being "frequently down". 

It costs btc to transfer assets because Counterparty exists on top of the bitcoin blockchain.  It's no different then paying a fee for a transaction with ANY coin.

If you think the exchange is slow then perhaps your not paying enough in fees to correspond with your expectations.  Again, this has to do with bitcoin and the current btc mempool more so then Counterparty.  If you want to make a bitcoin transaction happen faster then you add a higher fee.  Likewise, you would do the same with a Counterparty transaction.

Counterparty has a decent history in terms of crypto and it works well in my opinion.  If CURE were to add some sort of features on top of the Counterparty platform I would likely be even more interested in CURE.

[ComputerGenie]

Thanks for your answer.  I'm only going to counter you once here because this is the CURE thread and I'm not sure how relevant this discussion is.

I haven't experienced Counterparty being "frequently down".  

It costs btc to transfer assets because Counterparty exists on top of the bitcoin blockchain.  It's no different then paying a fee for a transaction with ANY coin.

If you think the exchange is slow then perhaps your not paying enough in fees to correspond with your expectations.  Again, this has to do with bitcoin and the current btc mempool more so then Counterparty.  If you want to make a bitcoin transaction happen faster then you add a higher fee.  Likewise, you would do the same with a Counterparty transaction.

Counterparty has a decent history in terms of crypto and it works well in my opinion.  If CURE were to add some sort of features on top of the Counterparty platform I would likely be even more interested in CURE.

Without a 3rd party app, you can't set the fees; Counterparty has them preset. Paying a 3rd party some value of CoinB (that they determine) to transfer CoinA from User1 to User2 is nothing like paying a portion/percentage of CoinA to transfer CoinA from User1 to User2 (you're in more of a traditional banking system with the former). In the grand scheme of things, what is the "added value" of a 3-way back-riding of Bitcoin in order for a coin to function? If CC bastardizes itself into a Counterparty asset, I'm going back to mining over folding.

[URSAY]

Without a 3rd party app, you can't set the fees; Counterparty has them preset. Paying a 3rd party some value of CoinB (that they determine) to transfer CoinA from User1 to User2 is nothing like paying a portion/percentage of CoinA to transfer CoinA from User1 to User2 (you're in more of a traditional banking system with the former). In the grand scheme of things, what is the "added value" of a 3-way back-riding of Bitcoin in order for a coin to function? If CC bastardizes itself into a Counterparty asset, I'm going back to mining over folding.

Again, forgive me if this discussion is irrelevant as I'm not as educated with FLDC in comparison to other assets on Counterparty.

There are legit apps which allow you to set fees.

More like a traditional banking system how?  Your essentially trusting bitcoin as the operating layer.  A coin transfers to another user with transaction fee in the same way almost ALL crypto currency works.  Miner receives fee and user receives coins.
If your beef is with bitcoin itself and it's current political dramas then that makes sense and I understand.

The value of Counterparty is that it runs on top of bitcoin which is maintained by the bitcoin devs.  Counterparty and it's users are free to develop their ideas further without the time consuming processes of maintaining a completely new blockchain and all of the details that this involves.  Both systems are open source.  Bitcoin is the king of crypto.  Why not use bitcoin's strengths and avoid re-development of another, weaker blockchain?  

[ComputerGenie]

...A coin transfers to another user with transaction fee in the same way almost ALL crypto currency works...

No, 2 separate coins (Bitcoin and the asset you actually want to transfer) transfer between 3-4+ parties (depending on the asset).

[URSAY]

...A coin transfers to another user with transaction fee in the same way almost ALL crypto currency works...

No, 2 separate coins (Bitcoin and the asset you actually want to transfer) transfer between 3-4+ parties (depending on the asset).

Yes, a transparent and alternative form of development, building on the strengths of btc, and arriving at the same desired result/solution with less overhead.

I'll try and find some time to educate myself about FLDC and how it relates to this discussion with CURE.  In the meantime, can you tell me if you have a preferred platform over Counterparty and why?  Interested in your insights.  Thanks.

[ComputerGenie]

Yes, a transparent and alternative form of development, building on the strengths of btc, and arriving at the same desired result/solution with less overhead.

I'll try and find some time to educate myself about FLDC and how it relates to this discussion with CURE.  In the meantime, can you tell me if you have a preferred platform over Counterparty and why?  Interested in your insights.  Thanks.

My preferred platform is none. There's no reason that PersonA shouldn't be able to directly give/send CoinX to PersonB on a platform of their choosing (not one designated by the "devs" of CoinX) using the protocols of CoinX.
Setting that aside, we might as well agree to disagree and move on, because there's no way that you (or anyone else) will ever be able to form a convincing argument that will get me to want to buy CoinY to use CoinX (it just makes more sense to use CoinY alone).

[URSAY]

My preferred platform is none. There's no reason that PersonA shouldn't be able to directly give/send CoinX to PersonB on a platform of their choosing (not one designated by the "devs" of CoinX) using the protocols of CoinX.
Setting that aside, we might as well agree to disagree and move on, because there's no way that you (or anyone else) will ever be able to form a convincing argument that will get me to want to buy CoinY to use CoinX (it just makes more sense to use CoinY alone).

Ahhh I see.  You'd rather ignore the existing use cases for a successful platform and reply with an emotional response minus any data points.  I'm not trying to convince you of anything.  I thought you might of had an interesting view or meaningful insights.  Nevermind sir.   

[QuintLeo]

...I don't see ANY major hardware reseller wanting anything to do with FLDC as long as they continue to insist on using that garbage Counterparty junk.

There's, literally, not a single sentence in this whole thread that I agree with more than that one. 

What is it that you don't like about Counterparty?

The "wallet" is slow and painful to use, as well as being VERY counter-intuitive.
The "exchange" is a bloody joke - you end up LOSING money to get most of the non-FLDC coins transfered into something usefull, and get hit *twice* with fees for doing so - FLDC is bad enough but at least the value is somewhat higher than the ripoff fees.
 The fees are a MASSIVE ripoff - commonly 10 TIMES what the actual Bitcoin fees for a transaction are, often higher.
 (no, you CAN'T set the bloody fees in any way shape or form)

What is there to like about Counterparty? I can't think of ANYTHING.

 FLDC should have their own wallet like most sane coins have, or at least a setup similar to CURE instead of their current "feed one of the bigger ripoffs in the cryptocoin world" setup - or they should just merge into CURE instead of making themself a redundant junkcoin.


 For those that don't know what FLDC is, it's "FoldingCoin" that serves as an additional income source for F@H participants - and it's why a lot of Team Curecoin have those really long "usernames" - part of that username is our FoldingCoin address.