|
|
Comparison to curecoin
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:<br>
- 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:<br>
- Gridcoin participants can select from a broad scope of scientific projects (up to 70) from the BOINC network (ranging from Protein Folding, SETI, Collatz Conjecture Mathematics, etc)
- CureCoin only hosts Protein Folding due to a GPU-centric model of Folding at Home DCN (F@H outputs over 40,000 TeraFLOPS -the worlds fastest DCN per day as of this writing).
- Gridcoin has a built-in sql feature, which allows full queries against the chain.
<nowiki>*</nowiki> Future versions of CureCoin will likely move away from ASIC mining, however SHA-256 currently remains an option for 19% of the network
<br><nowiki>**</nowiki> It should be re-emphasized that Gridcoin currently has a broad selection of DCN/GCN projects for participants to chose from (beyond Protein Folding)
