Topic: Official Poll for "CureCoin" has been requested by Stanford University (Read 7323 times)

And 4 years later you have decided to deploy some ginormous farm that is DESTROYING the profitability of not only CureCoin but FOldingcoin.

 How many of the "10% reserved for developers" coin are FUNDING this farm?

 Why are you so clueless as to not realise how many OTHER FOLDERS YOU ARE PISSING OFF WITH YOUR ACTIONS?

 Developers should be working to improve the coin and it's value, NOT ACTIVELY DESTROYING IT FOR ALL OTHER PARTICIPANTS.

The currency will be split 45/45/10, with 45 going to miners, 45 going to folders, and 10 going towards supporting the network infrastructure, improving the coin, giving away hardware to folders to increase folding rates, pay for servers, etc. So folders will get money. That's why I'm so excited xD

I think it's a definitely good idea, but why stop at curing cancer? We could use the hashing power for other scientific projects people need help with, maybe ones that could even make quite a bit of money for people involved in this coin, for instance, what about donating hashing power towards uncovering space flight algorithms if there even is such a thing? lol

Bravo

if there's something in it for miners besides 'feeling good', i would gladly.

making me 'feel good' isn't gonna pay my bills, so without any reward, not a chancei n hell.

Cancer is big business , won't this bring  government  and cancer business down on crypto ? If  try to really find cure ?

did anyone notice how cygnus got an email with these details of stanford's lab leader talking about building a coin with research pow?? This detail has not been mentioned in detail anywhere else on the web, checked the folding forums, googled for days....... i wish the stanford peeps would join up with team curecoin and make it super badass. So far it seems that stanford approves of the project but does not want to be involved in the creation of it ( probably legal reasons surrounding btc as currency in the states, this is mention in one of their bitcoin class blogs)  

I wanna see more votes on this, now that the project is making progress.

edit-- this thread was buried pretty deep --- odd that this long ago that detail was leaked...

edit-- maybe vorksholk is the hidden stanford agent and not the mystery dev...

I'm probably gonna start a new thread when I get home from work. The thread will probably be titled CDCcoin. A pun on center for disease control. But actually meaning cure dev coin. I have a bunch of ideas. But to make a real cure coin first we should make a test run and get community feedback and make sure its actually going to work.

Maybe you guys can pick this idea apart for me.

Blocks created based on the api system of the folding network. Their api system is pretty high power. I read in theory a block can be triggered by pretty much any type of event.

Api created blocks could be confirmed 120 times or so before the reward matures. Creating typical level of crypto coin security.

Here is the problem with that idea though. The api handler would have to know what user name on the folding network is associated with which coin address.
This can probably be configured somehow... Still working on more ideas for that.

This is one of 2 main solutions im going to look at. I have to get back to work. Will discuss the other idea after you all get your chance to rip this one apart.

Oh. The private passkey you get for folding would be a good thing to integrate instead of username. It could be possible maybe to put your passkey in your CDC client to connect straight to the folding api and get your user stats. When confirming blocks the username tied to the passkey would be enough for other clients to call api and verify that the folding points were received.

There is some interest among freicoiners (central initial distribution of 80% of the coins, 20% to miners, over 3 years) for giving away freicoin proportionally to computer power donated to charitable causes.

I guess this could be easily implemented together with most other ideas and concepts for CureCoin. No problem in making a common hashing-faucet with several different coins (Devcoin should fit nicely for this also). Many different coins in the same hashing-faucet could even make it profitable to participate!

A double approach with much of the coins donated as CureCoin, together with keeping some reasonable fraction of the hashing power for Cure Coins own blockchain, where miners get their share (like Freicoin but only with the whole 80% all going as donated CureCoin), should be technically simple to implement (you would need some central organization, though)

Hear hear!  +1 and then some!

This is an amazing idea and hats off cygnusxi for getting this far so fast.
Brings a whole new meaning to Currency too.  
Following closely!

I like the idea of auctioning out computational power, as a researcher in molecular dynamics I would like having access to this when additional computing power is needed.

Id like to see new research coins coming out as fast as all the alt coins ive been trying to keep up with... how many alt coins are there now?

Mining would be so much more interesting if you could choose between coins with different research causes. Now we just choose coins based and difficulty and popularity..

What's the point?

CANNABIS CURES CANCER

I would mine the hell out of this project

It's true that some centralization will be necessary for a project like F@H because they have to provide the network with new data to work on once in a while.  The proof of work algorithm on the other hand can be centralized or not depending if it's possible to implement something that works for all future proteins.   Decentralized is of course better but, I would still "mine"  for a project where the proof of work algorithm is manipulated by a central authority if I have trust and respect in the said authority.   I know that not everyone trust universities but I personally trust them more than banks!  The most important part I think is not that it's centralized or not but that participant can't cheat and that the project offers total transparency.

I think that if we wan to get a lot of miners into this, we need to find the right scientific project.   We need to find a project that is only based on pure maths and where the proof of work would be undeniable.  The only project that comes to mind is the PrimeGrid project where their goal is simply to find huge prime numbers, this is similar to hashing, no?    There are probably other good projects to look into.   The BOINC project page is a good place to look to get some ideas going: http://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Project_list

I'm all for "ScienceCoin" concepts, as long as there's a good POW function. Centralization is good in the case that a party can enforce the use of a certain algorithm, and implement checksums to make sure that the appropriate work has been performed, but is against the grain of most cryptocurrencies current out there.

BTW taco, forgive me if my ignorance is showing. My current field of study has nothing to do with protein folding or structure, and my knowledge is essentially in layman's terms (a scientific layman that is).

Would you mine for a "CureCoin" ?
With 100% of your hashing power    45 (47.4%)
75% of your hashing power    4 (4.2%)
50% of your hashing power    17 (17.9%)
under 25% of your hashing power    12 (12.6%)
Would not mine this coin at all.    17 (17.9%)

Total Voters: 95

So the btc network has been hashing at over 900 Petaflops for some time.. currently at 926.81 petaflops according to bitcoinwatch.com. It was over 960 just a few days ago.

47.4% of miners at 100% of 925 petalops = 438.45
4.2% of miner at 75% power = 29.13
17% of miners at 50% power = 78.625
12.6% of miners at 25% power = 29.13

Potential speed of curecoin network = 575.35 Petaflops
Current speed of folding@home network = 6.1 Petaflops

Potential speed increase of 94 times the current speed.

I guess that would be fast enough to speed up some cures  

Of course this is assuming that a poll of 95 votes is enough to calculate about the rest of the network... but still fun to look at the numbers.

*EDIT -- and one more vote for 100% while i was writing this --

I've had this idea in my mind for the last few months, but I haven't had the time to get started. I suppose the name CureCoin would generate more interest than my idea of ScienceCoin. The main point though was to release an alt coin that actually serves a purpose.

My idea was to auction out (in BTC) the hashing power of the network, and return on a pps basis to the miners. So essentially ScienceCoin would be a - cheaper than supercomputer option - for anyone requiring distributed computing solutions.  Obviously the hard part would be to figure out how to allocate simulations/problems to the entire network. I suppose something like Hadoop could be used for that?   
 

yes for decades, very interesting!! Professor Pande is a smart guy. He is not going to launch a fail coin.

Not to mention he has a team of scientists that im sure all extremely capable of making this really happen.

It not just a few kids making a new alt coin for fun like the new china coin, or min coin... etc this is a whole new ball game