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

[cameronpalte]

Is anybody folding on 750 Ti's? I can't seem to pick up Core 17 units even with client-type=beta.  This sucks.

There have been issues with FAH software not recognizing the new Maxwell architecture - hopefully they will soon - its a known issue and had been one long before the coin came out. Hopefully they get it fixed those this is a super efficient card and I'd love to pickup a few .

[1715587685]

1715587685

[1715587685]

1715587685

[1715587685]

1715587685

[1715587685]

1715587685

[1715587685]

1715587685

[1715587685]

1715587685

[hardcoreprime]

OK, finally got my first payment today at Cryptobullions pool, however, I've been waiting over an hour for the payment to withdrawal to my wallet.  Anyone else experience this?

I've experience that it takes a few hours if you set manual payment. But if you have the payment then you'll definitely receive it relatively soon.

Tells me "Your withdrawal request has been scheduled and will be processed within 1 minute."....... I'm still waiting with manual payment and its been over 4 hours

[mistersushi]

So my GPU and CPU have been been cranking away for ~2 hours now.  Everything seems good on the client side, but when I click on my user name link in FAHControl, the webpage that comes up indicates that I am ranked dead last out of all IDs, with zero (0) active clients.  Is this to be expected, or is something not right?

[r3animation]

So my GPU and CPU have been been cranking away for ~2 hours now.  Everything seems good on the client side, but when I click on my user name link in FAHControl, the webpage that comes up indicates that I am ranked dead last out of all IDs, with zero (0) active clients.  Is this to be expected, or is something not right?

Are your GPUs folding and have you completed 1 work unit yet?

[cameronpalte]

OK, finally got my first payment today at Cryptobullions pool, however, I've been waiting over an hour for the payment to withdrawal to my wallet.  Anyone else experience this?

I've experience that it takes a few hours if you set manual payment. But if you have the payment then you'll definitely receive it relatively soon.

Tells me "Your withdrawal request has been scheduled and will be processed within 1 minute."....... I'm still waiting with manual payment and its been over 4 hours

Manual payment comes once or twice a day but your request has been processed to keep people from timing submissions.

[cameronpalte]

Respectfully, I think you're dead wrong on merged mining. Any block that is solved by merged mining comes from work already produced on the primary blockchain. Mining BTC alone or mining BTC with CureCoin being merged mined (or even 6 coins being merged mined) should not have any impact on your BTC income or power usage. The advantage of this being: if curecoin is not profitable, it will be hard to keep up a large ASIC support network - but, if it's merged mineable, you no longer need to be high-profitability to get hashrate. Miners will merged mine you because it is "free" to them - while supporting your network.

If you have plans to be a top player and capture a segment of the ASIC hashrate, then by all means, proceed. But in the much more likely event that the coin will not be a primary mining target for profits, merged mining offers a very real and very efficient solution to the network hashrate problem.

*Please remember I'm not the developer of the coin.

I see the advantage but I feel like it is outweighed but what I see as 2 disadvantages.
1) Curecoin and Bitcoin use the exact same algorithm. Therefore the way I see it is power used to solve the Bitcoin algorithm is power not used for the Curecoin algorithm. We may get more miners but each would be doing less - of course I may be totally wrong by this, I've never tried merged mining - feel free to correct me if that view is not correct.

2) I don't like the idea of the coin being reliant on any other coin - that is if curecoin becomes successful and bitcoin crashes I would want people to focus on mining Curecoin.


My personal plans for marketing the coin is to be a top player - a coin that is the same as Bitcoin transaction wise but with the size benefit of research. I can see merged mining being an efficient solution but as off now we may have even too many people mining profitability wise - our difficulty is already over 0.1% that of Bitcoin - not bad for a coin slightly over 2 days old with a network hashrate of 78 th/s.


Let me know if I'm wrong about how merged mining works I'll go do some more research, thank you for presenting your points.

[khoileminh]

What can i do when GPU run to 99,99% for many hours, not to 100%?

And when a gpu run to 100%, it will auto return to 0% and keep running?

Thank you

[cameronpalte]

What can i do when GPU run to 99,99% for many hours, not to 100%?

And when a gpu run to 100%, it will auto return to 0% and keep running?

Thank you

What do you mean by that? GPU running at 99.99% is effectively the same to it running at 100% and should be treated as such.

And what do you mean auto return to 0%.




GPU Utilization isn't the best method of folding focus on PPD per your specific card.

[iopq]

Respectfully, I think you're dead wrong on merged mining. Any block that is solved by merged mining comes from work already produced on the primary blockchain. Mining BTC alone or mining BTC with CureCoin being merged mined (or even 6 coins being merged mined) should not have any impact on your BTC income or power usage. The advantage of this being: if curecoin is not profitable, it will be hard to keep up a large ASIC support network - but, if it's merged mineable, you no longer need to be high-profitability to get hashrate. Miners will merged mine you because it is "free" to them - while supporting your network.

If you have plans to be a top player and capture a segment of the ASIC hashrate, then by all means, proceed. But in the much more likely event that the coin will not be a primary mining target for profits, merged mining offers a very real and very efficient solution to the network hashrate problem.

*Please remember I'm not the developer of the coin.

I see the advantage but I feel like it is outweighed but what I see as 2 disadvantages.
1) Curecoin and Bitcoin use the exact same algorithm. Therefore the way I see it is power used to solve the Bitcoin algorithm is power not used for the Curecoin algorithm. We may get more miners but each would be doing less - of course I may be totally wrong by this, I've never tried merged mining - feel free to correct me if that view is not correct.

2) I don't like the idea of the coin being reliant on any other coin - that is if curecoin becomes successful and bitcoin crashes I would want people to focus on mining Curecoin.


My personal plans for marketing the coin is to be a top player - a coin that is the same as Bitcoin transaction wise but with the size benefit of research. I can see merged mining being an efficient solution but as off now we may have even too many people mining profitability wise - our difficulty is already over 0.1% that of Bitcoin - not bad for a coin slightly over 2 days old with a network hashrate of 78 th/s.


Let me know if I'm wrong about how merged mining works I'll go do some more research, thank you for presenting your points.

Merged mining gives free power to the coin
for example, when namecoin came out it had a problem of being pool mined to a very high difficulty
but its difficulty adjustment algorithm was the same as bitcoin's so when it got too expensive to mine EVERYONE stopped
then it was stuck at high difficulty (a few million if not a little below a million)

merged mining means namecoin has difficulty of over 5 billion and increasing
there is just no comparison between merged mining security and non-merged mining because you actually get 100% of the mining power of each miner, not a part of it
the only reason the difficulty is lower than BTC is because some pools don't mine namecoin

but yeah, namecoin being mergemined with BTC made it have a difficulty more than 60% that of BTC

[cameronpalte]

Respectfully, I think you're dead wrong on merged mining. Any block that is solved by merged mining comes from work already produced on the primary blockchain. Mining BTC alone or mining BTC with CureCoin being merged mined (or even 6 coins being merged mined) should not have any impact on your BTC income or power usage. The advantage of this being: if curecoin is not profitable, it will be hard to keep up a large ASIC support network - but, if it's merged mineable, you no longer need to be high-profitability to get hashrate. Miners will merged mine you because it is "free" to them - while supporting your network.

If you have plans to be a top player and capture a segment of the ASIC hashrate, then by all means, proceed. But in the much more likely event that the coin will not be a primary mining target for profits, merged mining offers a very real and very efficient solution to the network hashrate problem.

*Please remember I'm not the developer of the coin.

I see the advantage but I feel like it is outweighed but what I see as 2 disadvantages.
1) Curecoin and Bitcoin use the exact same algorithm. Therefore the way I see it is power used to solve the Bitcoin algorithm is power not used for the Curecoin algorithm. We may get more miners but each would be doing less - of course I may be totally wrong by this, I've never tried merged mining - feel free to correct me if that view is not correct.

2) I don't like the idea of the coin being reliant on any other coin - that is if curecoin becomes successful and bitcoin crashes I would want people to focus on mining Curecoin.


My personal plans for marketing the coin is to be a top player - a coin that is the same as Bitcoin transaction wise but with the size benefit of research. I can see merged mining being an efficient solution but as off now we may have even too many people mining profitability wise - our difficulty is already over 0.1% that of Bitcoin - not bad for a coin slightly over 2 days old with a network hashrate of 78 th/s.


Let me know if I'm wrong about how merged mining works I'll go do some more research, thank you for presenting your points.

Merged mining gives free power to the coin
for example, when namecoin came out it had a problem of being pool mined to a very high difficulty
but its difficulty adjustment algorithm was the same as bitcoin's so when it got too expensive to mine EVERYONE stopped
then it was stuck at high difficulty (a few million if not a little below a million)

merged mining means namecoin has difficulty of over 5 billion and increasing
there is just no comparison between merged mining security and non-merged mining because you actually get 100% of the mining power of each miner, not a part of it
the only reason the difficulty is lower than BTC is because some pools don't mine namecoin

but yeah, namecoin being mergemined with BTC made it have a difficulty more than 60% that of BTC

Ok, so I understand how merged mining works - it wouldn't make it so that less power goes to curecoins - that solves my first problem. However, I still dislike the idea of the coin being directly connected to another coin, I personally as an investor would prefer if the coin stood alone by itself, I think it gives it a lot more future potential versus I believe namecoin would be tied somewhat to bitcoin.

More so, I believe curecoin has the ability to stand alone by itself.

But still a very interesting concept, thank you for bringing it up!

[FifthGhostbuster]

So i have now applied and suggested to every exchange i could find. if everyone else does the same cc is sure to be on every exchange very soon. and in the near future curecoin will be traded as a main coin as result.

[cameronpalte]

So i have now applied and suggested to every exchange i could find. if everyone else does the same cc is sure to be on every exchange very soon. and in the near future curecoin will be traded as a main coin as result.

Nice - I'll try to do this too.

[iopq]

What can i do when GPU run to 99,99% for many hours, not to 100%?

And when a gpu run to 100%, it will auto return to 0% and keep running?

Thank you

mine did this too for a little bit, but then I got new work from the server and it went to 0%
now I got my coins

[ciscokid]

Willing to buy 10k CURE for 1 BTC,

seems fair since that is what early "investors" paid. I asked many times months ago to invest but the "window" was closed. Instead of pre-mine for devs they could have taken BTC instead and allowed more investors. Anyhow, I don't think I will be supporting this project otherwise.

[iopq]

Willing to buy 10k CURE for 1 BTC,

seems fair since that is what early "investors" paid. I asked many times months ago to invest but the "window" was closed. Instead of pre-mine for devs they could have taken BTC instead and allowed more investors. Anyhow, I don't think I will be supporting this project otherwise.

Just put a buy wall at 0.00010000 and maybe you'll get some, there's only a few hundred up to that price on the scifi exchange

[r0ach]

- folding pool is not responsive - I have mined for days and not seen a payout or even an estimated payout.  This is a huge deterrant.

Sounds like mining Bitmonero

[r3animation]

Willing to buy 10k CURE for 1 BTC,

seems fair since that is what early "investors" paid. I asked many times months ago to invest but the "window" was closed. Instead of pre-mine for devs they could have taken BTC instead and allowed more investors. Anyhow, I don't think I will be supporting this project otherwise.

Yea I don't think so. Just buy on an exchange.

Showing dislike for a crypto just because you didn't get into the "window", is shallow given what the project is about.

[ciscokid]

Willing to buy 10k CURE for 1 BTC,

seems fair since that is what early "investors" paid. I asked many times months ago to invest but the "window" was closed. Instead of pre-mine for devs they could have taken BTC instead and allowed more investors. Anyhow, I don't think I will be supporting this project otherwise.

Yea I don't think so. Just buy on an exchange.

Showing dislike for a crypto just because you didn't get into the "window", is shallow given what the project is about.

That is not true at all.

I have much respect for the Curecoin team and think its awesome what they are doing. I have even told many people about it. But from an investment perspective, it does not make sense for me to buy them at anything but 10k/1btc, otherwise I will simply invest in something else that I can get in on from day one. Like Ethereum or eMunie.

[ciscokid]

And to be clear, the only thing I did not like was that they would not take additional investment. Why not? And just take less Curecoin from the pre-mine instead? Anyhow, we'll see how it pans out. But I am sure I am not the only one feeling the same way.

[404notfound]

- folding pool is not responsive - I have mined for days and not seen a payout or even an estimated payout.  This is a huge deterrant.

Sounds like mining Bitmonero

I have received a payout. It seems it takes about 48 hours on your first day to receive credit and a payout for your points then about 24 hours after your first payout for every other day. While the delay is annoying I can understand it. It forces miners to not hop to this coin just because it's profitable. This would make work much harder for the scientists that are using our mining power to help cure diseases. It would leave tons of uncompleted work units that would cause many anomolies in their data. If that happened enough then it could ruin their research.

Many people who don't believe in bitcoin say that it provides no value on it's own. In a way they are correct. It uses tons of power and there are better alternatives. It holds such are large market share primarily because it was the first of it's kind. Curecoin is the first of it's kind. It is one of the first coins to provide value on it's own. When I buy it I know that it represents a step towards a world free of disease. Mining it is more than just security and speculation it is an investment in a better future for all humanity.