Here's the problem for me. These mining operations can be exploited to an extreme. Any scientist or professor with knowledge in protein representations will have an unfair advantage over normal miners. This gap will be even larger than the hashpower gaps we see between ASICs and "normal" miners in bitcoin, litecoin, etc because scientists will have access to not only hardware but also extremely specific domain knowledge.

Isn't that good though? The scientists who make new discoveries get paid to do so, rather than just some random person with a gpu in their closet?

It's not, because no one would use a coin with such imbalance in mining power. It would be all around more efficient for people to just donate to scientists.

>Any scientist or professor with knowledge in protein representations will have an unfair advantage over normal miners.

I, for one, welcome our new protein folding overlords. May they rule us more justly than the investment bankers they've replaced. :-p

The problem with solving "real" problems instead of synthetic ones is that they aren't uniformly difficult, so clever people will game the system.

As long as gaming the system means solving a real problem, that would be a good thing right?

Not if you want the currency to replace traditional currencies in the future.

Presumably that wouldn't be a goal for such things. You could just as easily call them "coolness points" and use them as badges of distinction. That alone could motivate participation. God knows it works for Reddit.