{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1sjul23khr55e77kqjwk78k329gvvz97ynuzx92zkppxc7xnyyt9s5uh28y","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1sjul23khr55e77kqjwk78k329gvvz97ynuzx92zkppxc7xnyyt9s5uh28y","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2022-07-09\n📝 Original message:Hi Peter,\n\nInteresting blog post. \n\nOn Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 11:31:26AM -0400, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 08:24:51AM -0700, Eric Voskuil wrote:\n\u003e \u003e To clarify, price inflation is not caused by market production. Attributing the observed lack of inflation (eg fee %) to loss is an assumed relation.\n\u003e \n\u003e My article is a mathematical proof that has nothing to do with observations of\n\u003e inflation.\n\u003e \n\u003e What I did is prove that if there is tail emission/fixed supply, the coin\n\u003e supply will converge towards a fixed amount because the coin supply dependant\n\u003e rate of coin loss balances out the fixed rate of coin production.\n\u003e \n\u003e That proof has nothing to do with market dynamics and would happen in any\n\u003e system, economic or not, with similar underlying dynamics.\n\nI'm not a mathematician but I think your models assumption that coin\nloss is proportional to number of coins misses something, correct me if\nI'm wrong but as value of coins goes up is it not reasonable to expect\ncoin loss to go down as people are more careful (not to mention\nimprovements in tooling and education).\n\nIs it really possible to model coin loss as exponential decay\nconsidering such things (I'm not being facetious, that is a real\nquestion, like I said I'm not a mathematician)?\n\nCheers,\nTobin.\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 833 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220710/3ff76efc/attachment-0001.sig\u003e"}