Last Notes
GN https://haven.dergigi.com/bb97efdbb60577f6b5441e20ec3a9dbfc0b7b69b11cdc9830afaa357e22b1cda.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/3ffb9a9e8e4d506a263b6fa8d31c2593116bfcfd959e061b3aea8e0cb2157879.jpg
Fair enough
It seems to me that it's not really that different of an incentive structure whether it's open or closed software.
Either way, they're always provided as is, which covers everything beyond gross negligence anyway.
And whether it's being provided by a pseudonymous individual or group doesn't seem that different either. There are plenty of scammy companies that provide cover for individuals anyway.
So idk, seems like the incentive is profit whether they have reputation staked or not, does the liability profile change that much?
Im not sure that is actually borne out by the evidence though. In this case, we have the example of several known people contacting Coinkite about their firmware for example.
And all in all, OSS has a fairly good track record. Or at least, specific successful long-existing projects (ones that figure out their funding) have a good track record.
But obviously that's not a guarantee the project doesn't have major problems either.
But thats a very different kind of project than the modern anon klanker slop.
https://haven.dergigi.com/cb90f3b9843c8b81e8e93f568271b1b50aae0a2012c27894367d180221d994f7.gif
GM https://haven.dergigi.com/0507defc3f2a62456818a8441968692865539344894a2750edaf41621d6cf0d7.jpg
Greater than zero incentive is better than zero incentive.
But I don't think it's that much bigger than zero, even if the license is completely unrestricted.
There is a bigger question here about how open source software incentivizes testing.
the funny thing is that there's nothing wrong with BCH or 110coin
it just the people are insufferable
They made billions of dollars on the volatility that they created.
That's all this was about.
Twitter is bad for you
But that's really sad to see from hodlnaut 😖
People who get involved in principled legal battles are usually insane. Not because there's anything wrong with their principles, but because you have to be insane to navigate the legal system.
But who will arbitrate disputes?
I think some DEX use it for coordinating too
I know Luke Parker had a problem with it being depreciated completely.
Monero transactions have a TX_extra field that they were using similarly to op return.
Achualy
We had some dickbutts and they were a bit of a problem because people *could tell which outputs they were
Theres no problem with tail emission.
but fwiw I don't think Bitcoin should fork to include it.
#nevent1q…23hk
You're not doing ANYBODY any favors when you tell them to switch to a chain that isn't being mined.
be better.
It's fundamentally retarded to say because randos on the internet can't look up your transaction history, chain surveillance isn't a problem.
And it doesn't make any sense to assert that pseudonymity will hold. Unless there's some way to add entropt into the history of transactions over a long enough time frame the anonymity set drops to zero.
People don't check tainted dollars because the movement of dollars isn't recorded on a public blockchain anybody with a web browser can audit.
Neither does it make any sense to say that L2 solutions will solve the lack of on-chain fees. Lightning transactions don't pay miners.
So no,
NONE of those issues refute monero's fundamental L1 usefulness at all.
If you're just going to learn just one thing from bip110 it should probably be this.
#nevent1q…l9vl
When its just you, or you and a friend its the best way
A friend sent me this from Hawaii.
So delicious
https://npub1lxzaxzge0jq9u9cecucctdt5lslwgp7hcxmp2l0wn8r2ecjenwasu6svxa.blossom.band/faa90cb331f3308f4d65452ba71b64ac616a839e96a44132e181cb800cbf068a.jpg
https://npub1lxzaxzge0jq9u9cecucctdt5lslwgp7hcxmp2l0wn8r2ecjenwasu6svxa.blossom.band/2efd16ae177163d62ce70a5731bbd78fba787ef9c4f735e1d6592011b5a7060e.jpg
You cannot fight the incentives.
#nevent1q…tdh7
Of course getting them to read the documentation is another thing 🙄
also backups.
Make sure your agent has a cron job writing them to some volume somewhere, and all your VMs and containers are included.
People may use it instead of monero if it is secured by more energy and therefore offers greater protection against disruption.
Or maybe because they're concerned about scaling for some reason
Or they want smart contracts
Or NGU
But thats all I can think of.
Sure sounds like p2p cash.
Cheers ❤️
It's good for everybody to publicly work out expressing abstractions in a clear fashion
I don't think there's any interest in Bitcoin in legacy financial circles beyond speculation. They do not see it as a valid threat, because it can't be one anymore.
So it just becomes another vehicle for them to abstract and rent seek from.
The playbook is well understood.
But @nprofile…at7q disagrees with me and he's pretty smart too.
This is basically accurate.
Which is why monero people have been screaming from the rooftops about regulatory capture for years.
Sorry not sorry.
(also tail emission is better design and monetary policy)
"the idea" lives on in other chains already 🙄
why are people so attached to a specific history of transactions?
I think nosmero also gave the option to turn off zap receipts altogether or just notify the receiver.
It's all in good fun. Thanks for playing Meyer ❤️
Technically true, but it's a little different since the supply of fiat can be *created arbitrarily.*
When you can just will any number of monetary units into existence at any point in time, it makes sense to colloquially refer to it as "infinite". Because unlike algorithmic issuance, you never really know what the current supply is and there could always be more produced.
So technically speaking that's right, fiat supply never equals "Infinity."
But since an arbitrary number of units can be created at any point in time, it does make sense to refer to it with that term.
The same is not true for chains with unbounded algorithmic supply increase.
aaand we've come full circle ❤️
nevent1qqsqqqqn47fkjk9ujua5xfpnhdav38qj00ehw44k8yh2qncgp4hkz6gprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctvqy8hwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakszyrhwden5te0dehhxarj9emkjmn9qgs0npwnpyvheqz7zuvuwvv9k460c0hyqlturds40hhfn34vufvehwcsummd0
Its ultimately pretty boring. They have nothing to offer except team identification.
There are plenty of chains that can be used for monetary transactions and theres very little reason to support theirs in particular.
Bro these are a lot to scroll through every morning
It was just your payment target right?
There is no client currently for integrated zaps for Monero afaik, so there's no way to produce a zap receipt.
Payment targets are just a list of addresses and get paid out of band.
Not sure thats a complete sentence , seems like you just want to make sure the word "infinite" is included.
But sure, the block reward is a constant ,6 units per block, rate of inflation asymptotically approaches zero
and total supply *approaches infinity as time approaches infinity.
https://i.nostr.build/5cT84RUH1JnC2jpM.jpg
The *development of that technology seldom means *the first implementation* of that technology.
I appreciate the correction 👍
Austrian economics does NOT say you need a hard capped monetary supply.
A percentage increase, that also fluctuates, and most important is controlled arbitrarily, is bad, because you can't really plan for it.
Monero and Bitcoin have a decreasing percentage of inflation, while Bitcoin's stops in the year 2140 stops, while Monero's will not.
If you then add coinloss on top, both probably already are deflationary.
https://haven.dergigi.com/672efc5f8bd6bd46c800cb27d2ee8a0b28f8689318b28d0ad9b89c641a6eec16.jpg
This is just a function of people being early in a new technology.
In the future it will seem as ridiculous to mistrust proofs that guarantee supply
as it is to mistrust elliptic curve multiplication to derive unique addresses.
"How do you guarantee the supply on a obfuscated chain" is the new "how do you know they can't hack your Bitcoin"
Mathematics is reliable.
So youre SSHing to the VPS and using a TUI?
Nothing is permanent in the world of men.
Its the "the supply cap is already priced in" thing.
Since the consensus right now is a 21M cap, everybody must act as if there are ALREADY 21M. just some coins haven't been "unlocked" yet.
And since monero tail emission never ends, I guess we pretend that right now there are infinite coins? Despite the fact the number of coins is knowable at any time, just like Bitcoin?
Seems to make sense to them....
