Topic: [ANN] CureCoin 2.0 is live - Mandatory Update is available now - DEC 2018 - page 76. (Read 696267 times)

Almost every FLOSS software project in the world is underfunded.

Wikipedia (not quite FLOSS but similar) have to mislead users to get the amount of donations they get.

I recommend the devs hardfork to increase the development fund, be this by simply awarding themselves coins, or by increasing the % of new coins they get.

I think we're overlooking that which has made other mining networks successful.  BTC was first and so is popular as a store and transfer of value, ETH has smart contract functionality.  This creates demand for these coins (speculative or otherwise) which increases the price which incentivizes miners to support the network.

If we want more miners/folders then our coin must have a strong value proposition.  Currently it has none besides philanthropy and we are experiencing exactly how much that is worth in the marketplace.

Lets go through some of these - I'll let the devs respond separately in their time


First thanks for adding buy support, it would be great if other's would do the same as many of the coins adding liquidity are sourced from PS3EdOlkkola's donations - which ultimately go to support some great causes listed on the homepage.


Rather than criticism, based on limited budgets, we'd love to hear some suggestions on marketing from team experts on the subject.

I can tell you we've made contacts with a LOT of people on social media ... from 13 year old gamers, to college kids, physicians, Hollywood agencies ... all the way up to billion dollar philanthropic organizations and  VPs of fortune 500 companies. Search twitter, facebook and curecoin and you'll get nearly 250,000 hits. We interact multiple times per day across several social media platforms. We've sent emails, certified letters, packages and called decision makers in person. There are several educational, informational and entertaining videos published on Youtube about CureCoin (published both by the team or folding team members)

The concept isn't exactly easy to get across. You get a spectrum of responses ... from enthusiasm, to indifference, to optimism for the folding research (but ignorance about the purpose of the currency), to outright anger - spouting conspiracy theories about big pharma or "profiting from charitable giving".

We've found Hollywood people don't want anything on their computer equipment for fear of being hacked, while otherwise educated people don't want to load the folding client on their computers because they're afraid it will "burn it up".

We recently tried to convince the head of a cancer foundation who hadn't heard of FAH, but who works with Fortune 500 companies, to load an NaCl work unit in their chrome browser ... after several tries and reminders, they came back saying they were "just too busy at the moment".

I talked to a couple of marketing "experts" ... one is dismissive of the idea (not exactly a visionary), while the other who works with an major technology marketing company in NYC really liked the idea, but mentioned that for mass marketing the folding and wallet clients would need to be distributed in a single package. Re-distribution is something Pande Group does not allow for their folding client.

But complexity isn't what's stopping people in the crypto-community from folding :-) I'm somewhat convinced, due to incorrect, outdated, strategically misinformed posts still floating around on the web from 2013/14, the broader crypto-currency community makes assumptions about CureCoin's efficiency and rewards model that just aren't true (don't know how many times I've corrected people about our 19% SHA mining awards, who assumed it was 100%).

One of the near-term goals of CureCoin is to fund a 501c3 registration. This will hopefully open some doors in high places that were previously closed, but that in no way implies CureCoin simply wants charity status. The current trend is towards hybrid corporations. This involves processing CURE donations on behalf of charities while managing cloud folding services, developing new products and technologies around CURE once it can stand on it's own in the future.


Again, I don't want to respond on their behalf ... but I know they are busy refactoring some aspects of CC 2.0 code while working on a CC 1.x maintenance upgrade. That being said, the few times I've dealt with outside individuals interested in working for the project, the conversation fizzles when they find there is little in the way of $$$$ or BTC to present them for their hard work. For some aforementioned reasons, people just aren't that excited about accelerating research (yet).

If you know individuals with a crytpo-currency development background who are willing to "Work for CURE" on a limited basis, by all means have them contact Cyg or Vork any time.

what they are trying to achieve is probably rather tricky but really I doubt they take the project seriously.

shame because the idea was the best use of gpu power yet for pow.

If they want out I wonder what we could do with all the premine thats going to be used to pay the folders and how we could get new devs to set up the decentralised payment system.

I just think they tried but it's a very tricky thing to do.

They should use the dev fund to get someone in like tptb need war. He may be sympathetic to this coin since it does do some good. He could advise or help. Of course we would probably need to get a large pot of cure together for him. I don't know if he would help or not since i know he is busy with his own project.

If not some real full time smart devs need to be brought in to get this project off its knees.

I too have poured BTC into this over the years so feel your pain of trying to support the price.

I loved the idea but obviously the way the payouts worked with folders was not very advanced

that's not to say the dev team have not put effort in...they have but i think the next steps they are trying to take are probably steps too far for them.

I dont really know ....but the time this has taken is either due to them not knowing what to do, waiting on others to get back to them and work in with them or just not being that bothered about it.

a combo of all three i would guess.

Curecoin 2.0 was suppose to come out 2 years ago... It's getting ridiculous! 6 months delay is acceptable 2 years delay is ridiculous... 2.0.0a9 is now 3 months behind schedule AGAIN!!! No one will invest or support a dev/coin like that.

Sad because i think it's a great idea. unfortunately the people behind it don't seems to give a Sh**! So much can be done to bring attention to this coin but the people in charge are doing next to nothing...

There is 2BTC buy support on Polo... That's 800usd! the mkt cap is around 60k usd... Meaning no one give a sh**! What a Joke...

The only reason it went up recently it's because I supported the price! otherwise it would still be trading at 1700 with a mkt cap of 30k

1. idea: 10/10
2. dev: 2/10
3. marketing: 1/10

The dev need to get their sh** together. If people believed in this project and the dev. Lots of talented people would work on it for free and they would be no need to hire anyone.

Another few months and this coin will be dead...

Certainly folding has been the end of many video game addictions ... the guilt alone (whether justified or not) takes care of those cravings.

folding and folding and folding
can't mine anything with GPUs without feeling remorse and going back to folding almost instantly 

Keep in mind during CureCoin's initial seed funding (late 2013/early 2014), bitcoin peaked at $1150 USD. Then, over the course of a year, bitcoin's valuation tumbled to below $180 USD.

That's an over 80% drop in the value of the initially investment funds in CureCoin. At the time, there was an outcry over the 10% dev fund required to make the coin viable (over which you were a vocal opponent I believe). Based on community complaints, the dev funds were reduced to 3% which were still disputed as "profiting from charity" by some at the time.

So that's part of the reason why things move more like molasses right now. You can't hire additional developers away from paying projects until CURE is valued at least at a minimum break-even point for folding. That would add honest market liquidity.

As a side-note, Ethereum missed several release dates on it's way to Frontier (despite being funded - now with over $18,000,000 USD). And even today, exhibits occasional mining instability and user friendliness issues.

There should be some movement regarding your concerns over the next month. I’m confident Vorksholk will be able to share an update soon.

This project is a wasted opportunity. The only real use for POW mining and this coin is nowhere.

That is a joke.

You'd be better starting another coin same principle with a team of devs behind it not just a couple of people that probably work on it a couple of hours every 2 weeks in spare time.

where are we on CC 2.0? Is this update ever coming out?

I think you kind of answer your own question here, if folders were constantly dumping then price would be in steady decline. However it seems most folders are involved philanthropically and simply hold their coins. However I would consider some of the features slated for the cc2.0 as significant in terms of functionality, if you consider what is the function of curecoin? Its function at least in part is to replace wasteful POW mining with DCN research in the most decentralized manner possible, in terms of this there certainly are significant features coming.

Looking at the historical price of this coin, it's relatively stable.  There is no new and significant functionality or utility to look forward to in the future so buying on speculation of a price rise doesn't make sense.  "Miners" (folders?) must be constantly dumping to pay the bills so the price should be on a steady decline, but it isn't.  Is philanthropy really the explanation for this?

To summarize the main points of difference, removal of pre-mine for folding payouts and removal of sha-256 mining component in exchange for a certificate based model for coin generation. Quantum computer resistance, reduction in block chain size and forking prevention. Also the possible inclusion of other DCN's in addition to Folding@home. There's probably some other points not in this post but they aren't all that hard to find in the previous 10 pages or so.

Unfortunately currently there is not a lot creating demand for this coin, it is accepted by coinpayments.net but it hardly makes sense to purchase btc to trade to curecoin to pay for something using coinpayments. I did make a post a few pages back about demand which I will quote some of below.

"Something that has been discussed in the past is the possibility of DCN's (decentralized computing networks) providing buy pressure to encourage more users to contribute computing time. CC2.0 is certainly a step in the direction of making this idea more plausible though in reality it seems unlikely that stanford would pay anything for something they already get for free. I personally am in favor of the idea that DCN's pay some small amount in the form of buy pressure for curecoin in order to encourage miners away from wasteful pow and towards their own DCN, if the DCN could get the same results as they would hiring or running expensive supercomputers for less money by supporting curecoin it seems like a win-win to me"

Otherwise the only real buy pressure comes from speculators or those inclined to purchase on a philanthropic basis to encourage more contribution to Folding@Home.

this coin could have really been a top 10 coin. The development is snail paced.

What will be the biggest changes in 2.0?

BTW, what creates demand for this coin?

The eventual release of CC2.0 could trigger a rise in price but how big remains to be seen.

I really like the concept of this coin.  Are there any other similar projects?  GridCoin seems like one.

Are there any catalysts on the horizon for a big price rise?

IMO, the reason for the recent move up of Curecoin is the progress shown in this article: "Quantum Computing With Ordinary CMOS Transistors" shown at http://spectrum.ieee.org/nanoclast/computing/hardware/qubits-quantum-computing-with-run-off-the-mill-cmos-transistors.  Since quantum computing could be coming sooner rather than later, and our devs at Curecoin are working on quantum computing resistant crypto, more people are buying Curecoin.

how that exchange price raise but no news?