Comparison to CureCoin

From Gridcoin
Jump to: navigation, search

CureCoin leverages Stanford University's Folding at Home DCN and Proof of Stake (PoS) security model whereas Gridcoin leverages Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing with a Proof of Research (PoR) security model.

CureCoin rewards are divided four ways (at the time of this writing):

  • 76% - GPU Directly for Protein Folding (including support for the highly efficient Maxwell GPU chipset)
  • 19% - SHA-256 Mining* Securing the Blockchain
  • 3% - Development and Marketing
  • 2% - Donors

The Protein Folding technologies underlying CureCoin and Gridcoin** are complementary to one-another.

"Rosetta@home and Folding@home are complementary and address very different molecular questions."

Main Similarities:

  • Anyone with practically any Windows, Mac or Linux PC, can participate in either coin's underlying research, without the need for special equipment.
  • Both can be considered part of an emerging Epistemic Standard Economy.
  • Both strive to encourage broad public participation in scientific research.

Key Differences:

  • Gridcoin participants can select from a broad scope of scientific projects (up to 30) from the BOINC network (ranging from Protein Folding, SETI, Collatz Conjecture Mathematics, etc)
  • CureCoin exclusively hosts Protein Folding due to a GPU-centric model of Folding at Home DCN (F@H has peaked at over 100,000 TeraFLOPS - the world's fastest DCN per day as of this writing).
  • Gridcoin has a built-in sql feature, which allows full queries against the chain.

* Future versions of CureCoin will likely move away from ASIC mining, however SHA-256 currently remains an option for 19% of the network
** It should be re-emphasized that Gridcoin currently has a broad selection of DCN/GCN projects for participants to chose from (beyond Protein Folding)