{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub15wz8j5cse6sexlw6f5q7arc5efe5hxn6kcxxyy222et8qms4u3lsemaru8","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub15wz8j5cse6sexlw6f5q7arc5efe5hxn6kcxxyy222et8qms4u3lsemaru8","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2022-07-11\n📝 Original message:I believe it's foolish to attempt objective definitions of things that we\ndefine collectively, like \"Bitcoin.\"  The best any one of us can do is to\nbe consistent with a subjective personal definition.  I believe most people\ndo that with the term \"Bitcoin\" and that the capped supply is intrinsic to\ntheir subjective definitions.  It is to mine.  Leading bodies, such as the\nBitcoin core team, the Ethereum foundation, and every government, are\nconstantly in danger of confusing objective reality with their own\ndecisions.  Since people have autonomy, the best a leading body can do is\nrecommend their decisions.  The common error is one made by governments,\nwhere they react violently to defiance of the definitions they make.\nShadows of that error show up in nongovernmental leading bodies as\nostracism, criticism, and even sometimes illegal activity against such\ndefiance of decisions.  What I mean here is that John is right in a sense\n(\" removing this limit results in something that can no longer be called\nBitcoin.  \"), but I don't think the way he expressed it is as helpful as it\ncould be.  There are many who will not call it Bitcoin, and I am among them.\n\nOn Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 8:13 AM Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 04:57:57PM +0200, John Tromp via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e New blog post:\n\u003e \u003e \u003e\n\u003e https://petertodd.org/2022/surprisingly-tail-emission-is-not-inflationary\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e A Tail Emission is best described as disinflationary; the yearly\n\u003e \u003e supply inflation steadily decreases toward zero.\n\u003e\n\u003e _Apparently_ inflation. True monetary inflation includes lost coins - both\n\u003e intentionally and accidentally lost. It's quite possible that even with\n\u003e tail\n\u003e emission Monero is currently a monetarily deflationary coin, as the lost\n\u003e coin\n\u003e rate might be higher than the 0.8% apparent tail emission rate.\n\u003e\n\u003e We just don't know. Doubly so in the case of monero where its privacy\n\u003e features\n\u003e hide coin activity.\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e \u003e If an existing coin decides to implement tail emission as a means to\n\u003e fund security, choosing an appropriate emission rate is simple: decide on\n\u003e the maximum amount of inflation you are willing to have in the worst case,\n\u003e and set the tail emission accordingly.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Any coin without a premine starts with infinite inflation. Bitcoin in\n\u003e \u003e its first 4 years had yearly inflation rates of inf, 100%, 50%, and\n\u003e \u003e 33%. So deciding on a maximum amount of inflation is deciding on a\n\u003e \u003e premine.\n\u003e\n\u003e Hence why I specified an *existing* coin.\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e While in the long term, a capped supply doesn't meaningfully differ\n\u003e \u003e from un uncapped supply [1], the 21M limit is central to Bitcoin's\n\u003e \u003e identity, and removing this limit results in something that can no\n\u003e \u003e longer be called Bitcoin.\n\u003e\n\u003e Personally I think basing your identity on a technical point that isn't\n\u003e even\n\u003e correct is stupid. And I suspect than when push comes to shove, if in ~10\n\u003e years\n\u003e or whatever Bitcoin turns out to be unstable without a reward, the market\n\u003e as a\n\u003e whole will be happy to redefine Bitcoin to remove the 21M limit. Whether\n\u003e or not\n\u003e it can do that fast enough to avoid Bitcoin dying first is an open\n\u003e question.\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n\n\n-- \nI own Litmocracy \u003chttp://www.litmocracy.com\u003e and Meme Racing\n\u003chttp://www.memeracing.net\u003e (in alpha).\nI'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist \u003chttp://www.voluntaryist.com\u003e which\nnow accepts Bitcoin.\n\"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules\" - Satoshi\nNakamoto\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220711/d60506ee/attachment.html\u003e"}