11 ms·

Sometimes I wonder if these articles are real or from The Onion. Why would someone doing research want to integrate something that literally makes a penny (1 GR

Sometimes I wonder if these articles are real or from The Onion. Why would someone doing research want to integrate something that literally makes a penny (1 GRD == 0.010754 USD). The real money is in grants. Write up a good grant proposal and you can get tens of thousands of dollars. I'm not the biggest fan of crypto, but I do acknowledge its success in certain areas. I'm just puzzled why so many people think its the solution to every problem.

roboticmind 6y ago
I think you may be missing what Gridcoin is doing. It is not going to the scientists themselves, but the people using their computers to help scientists. As well, I believe many of the projects Gridcoin rewards are grant funded (separate from Gridcoin) Note: I have around 5000 Gridcoin, so I may be biased in my view of the coin :)
- Ozzie_osman 6y ago
  > Note: I have around 5000 Gridcoin, so I may be biased in my view of the coin :) This is one issue with crypto. It's hard to tell whether people hyping it own it because you believe in it or whether you believe in it because you own it.
  - desmond373 6y ago
    I think the best solution is to not take anothers word for for its worth. Have a look at the system itself and tackle the issue of whether it benefits society/yourself/Group You Like, or not. I also mine Gridcoin. I don't know how much I have ATM, but I like that even when I'm away living my life, in some small part I'm helping a scientist find something new. The reward is just there to help with on boarding in my mind. If the coin ever jumped in price and a few miners see it as an investment, well hey its better than mining bitcoin and producing less useful data.
  - ant6n 6y ago
    Another problem is whether you believe you own anything that exists, or whether you just participate in some shared belief in its existence.
  - roboticmind 6y ago
    I agree with the other commenters that the best way to get an idea of it is to look at it yourself. It's hard to trust people in general, so that's why I left it in for more transparency. I think that's an issue that goes to more than just crypto too unfortunately. I'd agree that it's worse in the crypto world in general, however. If you want some degree of evidence that I believe in the coin, you can take a look at some of the work I've done[1][2]. None of this can tell you anything with high confidence unfortunately with out any real knowledge of each other, so the best solution is not to take my complete word on everything. Most of the work I've done is on the site and wiki system (208 commits)[1], and I've done a little bit on the wallet itself (19 commits)[2], but my C++ abilities aren't the best, so not as much as the site. Lastly, 5000 Gridcoin is really not a lot in comparison to most of the network, but still of course raises potential conflicts of interests. I know that it's still hard to trust anyone on this because there's a lot of shill type people in the crypto world unfortunately, so it's best to look at the system itself [1] https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Site/graphs/contributors https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Site/graphs/c... [2] https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/graphs/contributors https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/grap...
  - scotty79 6y ago
    > It's hard to tell whether people hyping it own it because you believe in it or whether you believe in it because you own it. Why does it matter? It shouldn't if you look at their arguments.
  - freewilly1040 6y ago
    It’s usually not that hard to tell.
nathias 6y ago
it's not competing with grant but the voluntary BOINC work ... I think Gridcoin is one of the few great projects, of a direction in crypto that is imo underappreciated, where proof of work would actually be doing useful work
- noxer 6y ago
  Its not competing, it prints money to reward people for voluntary work. Witch attracts people who would not do the voluntary work. And it attracts gamblers who throw real money at it in hope of price gains. So essentially it gives money from gamblers to "voluntaries" although very very likely the gamblers and the "voluntaries" are mostly the same people. So its basically just screwing over gamblers with the pitch that their loses are used for something somewhat useful. While at the same time some small group of people probably enriched themself along the way.
  - nathias 6y ago
    How is it screwing over the gamblers? Why would it be a problem if people got rich?
    - noxer 6y ago
      Why would they get rich if they give money to pay people for research in exchanges for worthless tokens? The research, even if it leads to something good for humans, does not add any value to the token. The token only has a value because gamblers speculate on a higher price in the future. The higher price can only be reached if more new gambler speculates on an even higher price and so on. We have a finite amount of gamblers so this can not go on forever and make everyone rich. Instead each wave of new gamblers makes the previous rich. But each wave has to be larger which untimely means the last and largest wave will be screwed over. Which Im totally fine with as long as people know the risk of being that last wave. The problem is on the side line there are people who never risked to be in that last wave because they simply printed the tokens and sold it. Like for example the devs that paid themself with these tokens thus inflating the supply which basically steals value form everyone who holds the token.

roboticmind 6y ago

I think you may be missing what Gridcoin is doing. It is not going to the scientists themselves, but the people using their computers to help scientists. As well, I believe many of the projects Gridcoin rewards are grant funded (separate from Gridcoin) Note: I have around 5000 Gridcoin, so I may be biased in my view of the coin :)

Ozzie_osman 6y ago
> Note: I have around 5000 Gridcoin, so I may be biased in my view of the coin :) This is one issue with crypto. It's hard to tell whether people hyping it own it because you believe in it or whether you believe in it because you own it.
- desmond373 6y ago
  I think the best solution is to not take anothers word for for its worth. Have a look at the system itself and tackle the issue of whether it benefits society/yourself/Group You Like, or not. I also mine Gridcoin. I don't know how much I have ATM, but I like that even when I'm away living my life, in some small part I'm helping a scientist find something new. The reward is just there to help with on boarding in my mind. If the coin ever jumped in price and a few miners see it as an investment, well hey its better than mining bitcoin and producing less useful data.
- ant6n 6y ago
  Another problem is whether you believe you own anything that exists, or whether you just participate in some shared belief in its existence.
- roboticmind 6y ago
  I agree with the other commenters that the best way to get an idea of it is to look at it yourself. It's hard to trust people in general, so that's why I left it in for more transparency. I think that's an issue that goes to more than just crypto too unfortunately. I'd agree that it's worse in the crypto world in general, however. If you want some degree of evidence that I believe in the coin, you can take a look at some of the work I've done[1][2]. None of this can tell you anything with high confidence unfortunately with out any real knowledge of each other, so the best solution is not to take my complete word on everything. Most of the work I've done is on the site and wiki system (208 commits)[1], and I've done a little bit on the wallet itself (19 commits)[2], but my C++ abilities aren't the best, so not as much as the site. Lastly, 5000 Gridcoin is really not a lot in comparison to most of the network, but still of course raises potential conflicts of interests. I know that it's still hard to trust anyone on this because there's a lot of shill type people in the crypto world unfortunately, so it's best to look at the system itself [1] https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Site/graphs/contributors https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Site/graphs/c... [2] https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/graphs/contributors https://github.com/gridcoin-community/Gridcoin-Research/grap...
- scotty79 6y ago
  > It's hard to tell whether people hyping it own it because you believe in it or whether you believe in it because you own it. Why does it matter? It shouldn't if you look at their arguments.
- freewilly1040 6y ago
  It’s usually not that hard to tell.

nathias 6y ago

it's not competing with grant but the voluntary BOINC work ... I think Gridcoin is one of the few great projects, of a direction in crypto that is imo underappreciated, where proof of work would actually be doing useful work

noxer 6y ago
Its not competing, it prints money to reward people for voluntary work. Witch attracts people who would not do the voluntary work. And it attracts gamblers who throw real money at it in hope of price gains. So essentially it gives money from gamblers to "voluntaries" although very very likely the gamblers and the "voluntaries" are mostly the same people. So its basically just screwing over gamblers with the pitch that their loses are used for something somewhat useful. While at the same time some small group of people probably enriched themself along the way.
- nathias 6y ago
  How is it screwing over the gamblers? Why would it be a problem if people got rich?
  - noxer 6y ago
    Why would they get rich if they give money to pay people for research in exchanges for worthless tokens? The research, even if it leads to something good for humans, does not add any value to the token. The token only has a value because gamblers speculate on a higher price in the future. The higher price can only be reached if more new gambler speculates on an even higher price and so on. We have a finite amount of gamblers so this can not go on forever and make everyone rich. Instead each wave of new gamblers makes the previous rich. But each wave has to be larger which untimely means the last and largest wave will be screwed over. Which Im totally fine with as long as people know the risk of being that last wave. The problem is on the side line there are people who never risked to be in that last wave because they simply printed the tokens and sold it. Like for example the devs that paid themself with these tokens thus inflating the supply which basically steals value form everyone who holds the token.