I don't doubt the urgency of the matter. However 300,000 computers is a bit over the top number.

Are you telling me that you about 1/4th of the Ethereum network (300,000 x 5 GPUs on average x 50 Mh/s each = 75 GH/s), and don't know basic shell commands in regards to cuda deployment? Something does not fit.

As for Cuda installation, simply follow nVidia's guide and generally it works to most Debian derived distros that I have tried.

I never understood this about PoW projects.

First of those are bots, so while blocking tradeogre is cute, it probably won't work because merge mining your coin is still better than anything else out there.

Secondly and most importantly you won't stop centralization on good will. You have to give people disincentives against centralization. That particular pool merge mines, nobody would deny the sweet sweet profits of merge mining just because you don't like them doing it. I can solo mine so that to help you however I'm just one guy. To actually solve the issue you have to incentivize solo miners.

Solo miners are plagued by "bad luck" you have to do something about it. One idea is to use a variable reward system that gives a fee to those that solo mine (or small pools) which you take from large pools (you take from them in the form of fee incurred).

So that giant pools, which is 80% of the hashrate should only get 70% of the rewards (say) and a small guy should be able to get 130% of the rewards ....

There is certainly a math formula that balances all out: The closer one is to the median hashrate of the network the closer he'll get a full reward, if you are below you get more, if you are above you get less. At the end of the day the inflation rate is balanced out between those that mine w bad luck and those that mine w better luck (large pools).

Just do it!

We're in the midst of an intense bear market. Develop! So that you can be different than your competition, be better and survive it.

It's not hashrate that secures a network it's decentalization.

If the hashrate is sky high yet controlled by one entity it's easy to 51% attack that network. If instead you have low hashrate but in disparate places it will be hard to attack it, esepcially if high hashrate devices cannot mine.

The monero network for example has 1/3rd of its peak hashrate yet is much more secured. No one entity is controlling its hashrate (like before) and there is not enough rented power to mount an attack to it.

The only way to attack the monero network for relatively cheap is to be the owner of one of its biggest pools and then *add* several million worth of equipment to your pool and then attack it. It's almost impossible.

By comparison all you need to attack bitcoin (for example) is to brick most of its miners via this method or similar: https://www.antbleed.com and proceed to attack.

Asic miners is the gaping hole in blockchains' security. Unless bitcoin becomes asic resistant it will never be secure from a technical standpoint. It is only secure from a game theoretical stand point... for the rime being.

Sumokoin just killed itself.

They were supposed to add ADK support (low fees), but they never did.

So ADK support is not coming any time soon? (it was signed last October, but still only BTC deposits are accepted)

I don't think any MasterCard is using Wavecrest. Only AdvCash did and they went down. It was expected after the shut down of their visa program as well. Either there is a crackdown again crypto-supporting pre-paid cards or (most possibly) Wavecrest was not compliant with EU rules and she went down.

~Half a bil credits but got rewarded for less as the reward only included credits that I've made up until October 1st
Still my rigs is a mix of good and old gpu power (that I prefered to have it folding in idle times) so my "winnings" barely cover the electricity costs, especially given that FLDC is almost half price to where it was at late August (when I started renting my gpu power).

That's quite interesting (what you wrote), I ran this.

http://foldingcoin.xyz/?token=FLDC&total=250000&start=2017-08-24&end=2017-10-07


It tells me that I should be getting around 2,700 coins per day for 44 days I made out half a billion credits in F@H in the meanwhile.

That is in total ~120,000 foldingcoings . Seeing as I only got 93,000, that's quite a difference (23% down) ... Any takes why that may be?


edit: Now that I think about it the distribution happened for whatever credits I had up until October 1st (instead of October 7th). It makes perfect sense that way, because indeed in the meanwhile I had produced around 20,000 more foldingcoins (which are not yet credited because they will be credited next month). Is that correct?

Can someone suggest a website where I can track folding coin's difficulty. Using curecoin's PPD as suggested here https://curecoin.net/merged-folding-profit-calculator/ is 25% off.
Since early last month I've turned all my cards into merged folding, I've mined ~3500 cure coins.

According to the above link I should get about ~115000 folding coins, yet -today- I only got 93000, that's quite a difference. And with the recent fall in folding coin's price I'm barely above energy costs.

So it's of absolute importance to be able to know the *exact* difficulty of folding coins. At this point I calculate it's 20-30% above cure coin's . Either that or distribution is not accurate...

Anyone can fill me in in this?