So, in other altcoins you don't think ASIC resistance is a feature?
One of the factors that makes a coin valuable is the number of users/holders, i.e. the distribution. The more people that hold a coin, the more value it has, usually. If more people can be involved in the mining or folding process due to Curecoin being 80% ASIC proof then that makes for a stronger foundation of support for the project.
One of the factors that makes a coin valuable is the number of users/holders, i.e. the distribution. The more people that hold a coin, the more value it has, usually. If more people can be involved in the mining or folding process due to Curecoin being 80% ASIC proof then that makes for a stronger foundation of support for the project.
In a coin that has NOTHING to do with asics except for the negation of, it's not a feature. It's a non-topic.
It's still a coin, and all coins have something to do with ASICS
Folding has as much to do with ASICs as a penny does. Both are coins, and both can not be mined with ASICs; This is every way in which both are related to ASICS. If someone is wondering whether or not to fold for curecoins and they land on "Well I would, but what about ASICS? I guess since it doesn't list it is ASIC proof/resistant I wont" Then they have no idea about what folding is and need to be asking questions to the community anyways. Why would we list ASIC proof/resistant when miners with ASICS are needed for the coin? And why is this topic going on and on? I am starting to think you are just being stubborn about it when you know you are incorrect. This concept has been being explained to you for hours now.