If you will not, then I will. The devs designed the difficulty in such a way that every block, POS or POW, punishes miners with a higher difficulty which never decreases until a POW block is found (but, as I said, does increase for every POS block found). Every block found in the last 92 hours 31 minutes has added to the POW difficulty while the POS difficulty is less than it was 100 blocks ago. The devs intended miners to be useless (despite what the OP says about 80:20).  

That you can "participate" with ASICs is true, just don't expect 100TH/s of ASICs to get paid enough to cover the electric costs of a CPU.  

There are well over 6000 registered CureCoin team member accounts on Folding@home ... with an average of ~10% (600) of those actively folding on any given day. Most of the top folders are merge-folding with FoldingCoin. http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_list.php?s=&srt=1&t=224497&p=1

From what I've learned in slack, CureCoin SHA miners compete with staking wallets. As ASIC technology advances, SHA miners can find mining CURE profitable during market gains- which is evident by the number of coins that come up for sale during price run-ups. That said, the coin is not dependent on PoW, since PoS still achieves distributed consensus on the chain. The devs originally put PoW in place to help miners without GPU folding equipment participate in the coin, but also to make sure the chain could be secured with very light-weight mining equipment in case too few wallets were staking in the beginning.

Although I'm obviously not a crypto-currency expert, I've been folding for longer than CureCoin has been around. The results of distributed protein folding research are made open source to any institute or private industry. Any patents resulting from the research are required to be made available for sale to private industry (although the NIH has stepped in to help further develop some research themselves - especially in the areas of Alzheimer's).

Contrary to common cynicism, the research done by distributed computing projects like Folding@home, Rosetta@home and GPUgrid is still in its infancy. There are so many factors effecting the molecular dynamics simulations being performed (right down to the quantum level), that an enormous amount of computing power will be required for decades to come - IF we want to understand them. The economics of this is what make research coins interesting to me. Up until recently, retaining long term volunteers for these projects has been a challenge - at the same time NIH, NSF and ERC funding has been flat or lower than 2002 levels (forget any dedicated HPC systems being built by any government specifically for this purpose until breakthroughs start materializing - the world's militaries still get the majority of use from supercomputers).

I look at Curecoin et al as helping expand the foundations of knowledge for biophysics.

That 20% mostly goes to POS wallets under the guise of "mining".  

Not sure I would call this "very slowly":

~50,000,000PPD increase in a month on top of the ~20,000,000PPD dip (or ~75,000,000PPD from the dip)

Because the truth is that it doesn't. I'm a POW mining fan because I'm heavily invested in POW mining equipment, not because it is actually any "more secure" than POS*.


*At a base level POS and POW are the same functions, but the reward and difficulty structures are different.

So Ive spent the last month figuring out the strengths of the 4 new core curecoin members and we are ready to hit the ground running. It slowed me down a bit trying to get a few people up to speed and there is still a bit of work to be done. Like C-Genie its fine to have a little knowledge until you want to actually do something in crypto space. There is no replacement for knowing the core of cryptocurrency.

There is an updated version of curecoin on github. Feel free to compile the latest version for yourself if you dont want to wait for the new compiled versions.

To that note, Ive noticed a lot of shit coins adding viruses to their compiled clients ( and sometimes even on their githubs ) that people tend to glaze over.  If you dont trust something dont stop to think that just running it in a VM will save you.

Obviously I am bias to curecoin as a big contender because I know what my plans are and my determination to see it through. I do have other coins I hold and of course I compile them from source.

I will be spending even less time posting here but that is from having a group of new team members that will be doing this for me. They will be getting their final briefing this week. I hope to get back to just working on the code like I much prefer over being a community "cheerleader".

If you have not read it already - Team Curecoin is smashing the record for computational research speeds. Coin price is at all time high and looking bullish. Normally I would give more talk when stopping here about whats happening in our game plans. Right now my big game plan for any free time outside of development plans is to get more rigs to fold with ASAP 

Cheers

Hey ComputerGenie,

I would be happy to sit down with you and try to get a feeling for your concerns. I'm not sure I can do much to change things, but maybe I can try and gather some feedback to bring back to the rest of the team.

Feel free to shoot me an email: todd at curecoin.io.

I completely understand and agree wholeheartedly.

1) I'll add a task to our team board to see if I can get this changed
2) We're working on strategic partnerships to increase the utility of the coin. I have this same concern and am working in many different regards to finding ways to increase the incentive to buy/mine/fold for
Curecoin.
3) I'll see if I can get this in front of Vorksholk to see if/how this is addressed in Curecoin 2.0
4) I understand and, though it may not mean much, apologize on behalf of the team. Thank you for your honest feedback.

I'm too lazy to look up if/where I said all of these thing (in order to respond in proper context), however, I'll go with the two most glaringly obvious...

"Reality check!"
I'm almost certain this was a case of me reusing the specific phrase that I quoted someone else (QuintLeo in this case) saying. While it is, admittedly, somewhat passive-aggressive, I have a tenancy to use some of people's own language back at them to drive a point home. If the use of a term offends you, then perhaps you shouldn't use it. 

"bribing people" (basically a crime!)
To bribe is "to give someone money or something else of value...[in order] to persuade that person to do something you want". I'm assuming we can agree on that much, no? While many definitions do include a modifier to "bribe" that is "often illegally", "typically illegally", or something similar, I'd direct you to realize that "often", "typically", and "always" aren't synonymous. The fact remains that as long as the only way to get CureCoin as payment for folding ("to give someone ... something... of value") is to be on team 224497 ("to persuade that person to do something you want" - i.e., not be on another team), it is a bribe. The implication of illegality is one you've drawn all on your own.

I think that you, like many others, are missing the central, fundamental point that it's not merely payment for being part of the larger project.
CureCoin is a payment for forgoing all other team choices and folding on team 224497, and on team 224497 only. I'm glad the term has "negative associations" because "it's REALLY A BAD IDEA to" pay people to be on team 224497 only.

Which synonym for "bribe" has enough "positive associations" for me to use in it's stead, so's to not offend your delicate sensibilities?