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.
Yeah, attaching to another coin at this point in time wouldn't make much sense.
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.
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.
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
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.
PoSV is a very interesting concept, however it has a number of potential drawbacks I see occurring, namely involving unnecessary blockchain bloat. It seems any method of encouraging higher transaction volume wouldn't actually encourage more spending, but rather simply cause tons of 'useless' transactions where a coin holder simply sends coins to another address they own.
That being said, right now we're looking at some form of anti-inflationary mintage schedule similar to what you described above, which would kick into effect after the classic mintage period finishes. As you said, simulating a precious commodity has to give at some point, if Curecoin is to be used as a currency.
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
Yup, we're stuck in a bit of a hard spot right now, simply because we don't want to push for too much merchant/exchange integration before we completely change the codebase on them! That being said, once we have a final system in place and further improvements are made to the platform without requiring new APIs to be implemented for use, promotion/marketing is the number one objective. Thanks for the positive words!
hello all, I need some help, trying to solomine this coin, I have some rockminers, some dragon miners and some zeus miners. None are working, the sha-256 equipment gives me a reading as if I am using the wrong equipment with this coin. It says everywhere even the pools this is a sha-256 coin but none of my sha equipment can mine it. So since the miner program gave me the errors as if i were using the wrong equipment with this algo i tried my zeus, becasue the difficulty in the wallet says 0.002 thus would mean its probably a scrypt coin with a difficulty that low, the zeus did connect yet mined nothing. It was hashing, however with a difficulty of 0.002 I would hope to get at least 1 block with my zeus blizzard 4 Mhash/s machine in an hour right?
SO what am I doing wrong here,
Added note the wallet about says its an X11 scrypt coin is this true? that would explain why the difficulty is rated in the wallet at 0.002 and why my shaminers cant connect or force the chainstate as well as why y zeus is not processing blocks.
That's... very odd. Have you had luck solo-mining other similar SHA256 coins? Curecoin is SHA256 for sure.