I know the DC community should grow and we should contribute to whatever projects we feel good about.

BUT,

Should Boinc be monetized for profit?

Because it is already happening...

GRC on Kickstarter: PiGrid - get rewarded for helping research projects at home

Is this the way we really want to go?

Paying users to run Boinc?

Read some of their other forums and you will see that their actual intention is to take over Boinc and incentivize it for user profit.

Something that the Berkeley developers/staff should be taking a long hard look at. Especially the ramifications of their software being used to make money, Bitcoin or any other type of profit.

BOINC is open source, anyone can use it for their science. Whether the project pays people to run their data, or asks for money to do so, is not up to BOINC to decide if that's possible or wanted, but up to the users. If no one adds a project that does things like this, the project will quickly turn around.

But on the other hand, being paid for doing the science of a project doesn't sound wrong to me. I'm sure that in hands-on science that happens as well, and besides in all other cases you pay for everything BOINC does with your computer. You fund the computer, the hardware therein, and the electricity it runs on. Might be nice if a project paid that back.

That one should be able to earn money running BOINC is my personal opinion, by the way. Don't look at my administrator or moderator titles for this, I have an opinion of my own away from BOINC as well.

Read some of their other forums and you will see that their actual intention is to take over Boinc and incentivize it for user profit.

By the way, do you have a link to the above?

---

BOINC is open source, anyone can use it for their science. Whether the project pays people to run their data, or asks for money to do so, is not up to BOINC to decide if that's possible or wanted, but up to the users. If no one adds a project that does things like this, the project will quickly turn around.

But on the other hand, being paid for doing the science of a project doesn't sound wrong to me. I'm sure that in hands-on science that happens as well, and besides in all other cases you pay for everything BOINC does with your computer. You fund the computer, the hardware therein, and the electricity it runs on. Might be nice if a project paid that back.

That one should be able to earn money running BOINC is my personal opinion, by the way. Don't look at my administrator or moderator titles for this, I have an opinion of my own away from BOINC as well.

Read some of their other forums and you will see that their actual intention is to take over Boinc and incentivize it for user profit.

By the way, do you have a link to the above?

I have no problem with Boinc being used to defray the costs of running it. or supporting a program that supports Boinc. Look at Bitcoin Utopia for an example.

I have a problem with Boinc being used for personal profit or as a tool specifically for profit by advertising.

Gridcoin is a team not a project, they stated that they intend to become the largest boinc team ever by advertising the ability to profit using it. and as an end result establishing their gridcoin cryptocurrency. They have been doing this for a while now and they have become the largest daily bionc producer. with the intent to become the dominant boinc group.

They have established their intents in their own forums. (highlighted text is the link you asked for)

Since the beginning, people are fighting for their (team) stats and NOT for any kind of reward. We, as the sub community, will eventually have to adapt to that system. Adaption means we have to USE the already existing incentive system for our own good.

I must establish my bonafides.

I was one of the six people at Ars Technica that exposed the Seti I text WU cheating scandal at the end of that project. Just before the start of Boinc.

I've been around a while. I currently boinc for team Overclock.net one of the more reputable Boinc communities, but I do not speak for them.

I am also speaking for myself as you are and the fact that I'm one of the top non bitcoin boinc producers in the world, must also say something.

I've invested one heck of a lot myself, and didn't take making this posting lightly.

They are not a project, they are a team, they are bending Boinc to their own use for profit. (By harnessing other users altruistic desires to contribute to science, the hook is for the user to defray some of the costs, all the while expanding their bitcoin network to the gridcoin currency developers profit)

If I remember what DA sent to me in one of his e-mails, Boinc wasn't intended for this at all.

If I remember what DA sent to me in one of his e-mails, Boinc wasn't intended for this at all.

I've been around a while. I currently boinc for team Overclock.net one of the more reputable Boinc communities

No need for pumping yourself up or name-dropping. Discuss the issue without attempting to surround yourself with a shroud of superfriends.

MANY people have used BOINC for years for the love of the game. Getting paid for it in cryptocurrency seems a natural progression to me... the only thing to be lost here is pride, and honestly, that doesn't really say anything good about the people unwilling to cross over.

Gridcoin is quickly becoming a "labour coin". I agree heartily with Ageless' sentiment that other scientists are surely being paid for their efforts.

I have no problem with Boinc being used to defray the costs of running it. or supporting a program that supports Boinc. Look at Bitcoin Utopia for an example.

I have a problem with Boinc being used for personal profit or as a tool specifically for profit by advertising.

Gridcoin is a team not a project, they stated that they intend to become the largest boinc team ever by advertising the ability to profit using it. and as an end result establishing their gridcoin cryptocurrency. They have been doing this for a while now and they have become the largest daily bionc producer. with the intent to become the dominant boinc group.

They have established their intents in their own forums. (highlighted text is the link you asked for)

Since the beginning, people are fighting for their (team) stats and NOT for any kind of reward. We, as the sub community, will eventually have to adapt to that system. Adaption means we have to USE the already existing incentive system for our own good.

I've invested one heck of a lot myself, and didn't take making this posting lightly.

Yeah sure Gridcoin has a team 'gridcoin' membership requirement, but your attitude is detrimental to your stance.

Since the creation of gridcoin 3 years ago, every time I've attempted to mention it on individual BOINC team forums users have reacted negatively due to the team membership requirement and instead of joining the discussion about gridcoin and proposing a change of this policy I'd instead just get banned from their forums for 'attempted team poaching' and they shun the project entirely.

Simply dismissing the project entirely because of the team membership requirement and cherry picking of individual team users (not developers) views is disappointing & is incredibly discouraging when continuing to argue the case of team membership requirement removal on your (and all 'non-team gridcoin' BOINC user's) behalf.

Since the beginning, people are fighting for their (team) stats and NOT for any kind of reward. We, as the sub community, will eventually have to adapt to that system. Adaption means we have to USE the already existing incentive system for our own good.

Pretty weak cherry picking a single Gridcoin user's stance out of a mutli-page thread on cryptocointalk, of which you did not participate in. If you oppose the team requirement, back up those who argue the same point.

The text you quoted argues against your stance, he's saying that 'Gridcoin will have to adapt to use the already existing incentive' i.e. removing the team membership requirement and instead of competing against the rest of the BOINC network (and going down the route of sub-teams within team gridcoin) rewarding all BOINC users for their BOINC computation.

The side for supporting the removal of the team membership requirement exceeds those who oppose the change. The user you quoted even updated his stance later in the thread: https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/44260-discussion-mandatory-team-gridcoin-membership-requirement/page-3#entry207164

There is no grand plan to replace the BOINC credit mechanism with Gridcoins, instead Gridcoin rewards BOINC users for their BOINC computation & in the future that may be all BOINC users, not just one team.

I must establish my bonafides.

I was one of the six people at Ars Technica that exposed the Seti I text WU cheating scandal at the end of that project. Just before the start of Boinc.

I've been around a while. I currently boinc for team Overclock.net one of the more reputable Boinc communities, but I do not speak for them.

I am also speaking for myself as you are and the fact that I'm one of the top non bitcoin boinc producers in the world, must also say something.

If I remember what DA sent to me in one of his e-mails, Boinc wasn't intended for this at all.

Your 'bonafides' are irrelevant to this discussion, speaking on the behalf of others not currently present in conversation (with no proof) is weak.

Whilst BOINC may not have been intended for this when BOINC was created well over a decate prior to bitcoin, it's now a reality.

They are not a project, they are a team, they are bending Boinc to their own use for profit. (By harnessing other users altruistic desires to contribute to science, the hook is for the user to defray some of the costs, all the while expanding their bitcoin network to the gridcoin currency developers profit)

This makes no sense. It's a cryptocurrency project that currently rewards a single team, if you are opposed to this requirement why on earth haven't you been involved in attempting to have this requirement lifted?

Regarding your accusations of profiteering by the developers, that's nonsense - first off the Gridcoin network has nothing to do with the bitcoin network (you don't know what you're talking about), and the developers are not a central issuing authority of gridcoins - Gridcoins are issued via distributed consensus through the POS and DPOR mechanisms (meaning users create the coins, no one person holds a stash of coins).

Since the creation of gridcoin 3 years ago, every time I've attempted to mention it on individual BOINC team forums users have reacted negatively due to the team membership requirement and instead of joining the discussion about gridcoin and proposing a change of this policy I'd instead just get banned from their forums for 'attempted team poaching' and they shun the project entirely.

Every time someone has come to my team's forums "educating" us on the latest crypto combining DC scheme (which many of my team members mined bitcoin), the initial "promotion" was presented with a "hey look at this great way to get paid to do what you are already doing...(you just have to switch teams)". When you go to a team forum and say look how great it would be to switch teams...that isn't just being informative. That is poaching. My teams forums actually split crypto out of the DC section so that it would easily address this issue and would prevent those against monetary gain in DC attacking those looking for a few $$. What those in the crypto for DC camp typically miss is that they are coming from a different culture of things. Their mindset is a bit different. Many people take pride in what they are doing and actually have loyalty to their team. Offering them a gamble of making a few $$ if they switch teams may be enticing to some, but it is offensive to many others. And yes it is a gamble as it is not much different than the cryptos before in its volatility. At least not yet. Quite frankly, Gridcoin needs BOINC or another popular DC. The DC community does not "need" crypto. It is a nice perk, but forcing people to switch teams to get that perk typically doesn't go over well in another teams forums. Just my $.02 USD.

Edit: Oh, and we typically did propose to remove the team change requirement. We just weren't going to go find your forums to discuss it as the topic was brought to us. Gridcoins offer to pay people is too small of an incentive to make it worth many peoples time to register an account and argue with people that are just as one sided as the other side is.

Notice a similar post from 2014 https://hardforum.com/threads/folding-protiens.1831468/#post-1041060486 in regards to CureCoin which was a folding@home crypto. They were one of the only ones actually trying to find a solution to the teams problem at that time. As far as I know they never came up with a good solution that didn't require giving them keys to your castle...

---

Since the creation of gridcoin 3 years ago, every time I've attempted to mention it on individual BOINC team forums users have reacted negatively due to the team membership requirement and instead of joining the discussion about gridcoin and proposing a change of this policy I'd instead just get banned from their forums for 'attempted team poaching' and they shun the project entirely.

Every time someone has come to my team's forums "educating" us on the latest crypto combining DC scheme (which many of my team members mined bitcoin), the initial "promotion" was presented with a "hey look at this great way to get paid to do what you are already doing...(you just have to switch teams)". When you go to a team forum and say look how great it would be to switch teams...that isn't just being informative. That is poaching. My teams forums actually split crypto out of the DC section so that it would easily address this issue and would prevent those against monetary gain in DC attacking those looking for a few $$. What those in the crypto for DC camp typically miss is that they are coming from a different culture of things. Their mindset is a bit different. Many people take pride in what they are doing and actually have loyalty to their team. Offering them a gamble of making a few $$ if they switch teams may be enticing to some, but it is offensive to many others. And yes it is a gamble as it is not much different than the cryptos before in its volatility. At least not yet. Quite frankly, Gridcoin needs BOINC or another popular DC. The DC community does not "need" crypto. It is a nice perk, but forcing people to switch teams to get that perk typically doesn't go over well in another teams forums. Just my $.02 USD.

I get the whole team poaching aspect, but it's a seriously toxic reaction that leads to BOINC communities isolating themselves from one another - it's not a healthy/positive aspect of the BOINC community.

Edit: Oh, and we typically did propose to remove the team change requirement. We just weren't going to go find your forums to discuss it as the topic was brought to us. Gridcoins offer to pay people is too small of an incentive to make it worth many peoples time to register an account and argue with people that are just as one sided as the other side is.

The last time I posted to [H]ard|Forum regarding Gridcoin (maybe a month ago now), it was in the cryptocurrency subforum and was entirely on the topic of "The removal of mandatory team 'gridcoin' requirement".

I asked for support from your team & community because I was initially arguing for the case of removal (of the team membership requirement) on my own, and in return my account was almost immediately banned and the thread deleted from your forum. I emailed the admin of the forum, he responded that he didn't care.

https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/44260-discussion-mandatory-team-gridcoin-membership-requirement/

56% of users in the above linked thread support the removal of the team membership requirement; I'm sure it'd be far higher if users outside of team 'Gridcoin' would bother to take 5 minutes to register on a forum to show their support rather than let 'team-poaching' pettiness override such logic.

Notice a similar post from 2014 https://hardforum.com/threads/folding-protiens.1831468/#post-1041060486 in regards to CureCoin which was a folding@home crypto. They were one of the only ones actually trying to find a solution to the teams problem at that time. As far as I know they never came up with a good solution that didn't require giving them keys to your castle...

Sure, your community may have once been open to discussing curecoin, but your community now censors any discussion of Gridcoin, even when it's about opening the system up to all teams instead of just the one team (eliminating the team-poaching aspect).

Which Moderator was it? If it was the owner, well... he isn't the nicest of people. If it was one of the others...I can probably convince them to leave it be.

You may call the poaching perspective petty, but that is just a biased opinion. From those that know what team loyalty is, well.. that is serious biz. Again, one of those crypto/BOINC culture differences...

---