0 sats \ 2 replies \ @jk_14 OP 16 Dec 2022 \ parent \ on: Milton Friedman & undeniable beauty of proof of future spiral of death Q.E.D. bitcoin
Both Austrian and Monetarists lived in time where gold was a real thing, and there was no even concept of digital gold.
If all plain gold available to mine is finished - it doesn't affect security of gold already in circulation. That's the difference between gold and Bitcoin.
Imagine for a while plain gold mines, which are in the future able to mine only negligible amount of gold. In the real world it simply force owners to shut down unprofitable enterprices.
And in Bitcoin it must run.
If "digital gold mines" will be running only thanks to transaction fees, i.e. there is one part of users who participate and pay tax in fact for keeping them running - and there is another part of users who don't participate and they are just a tax free riders - that causes obvious problem, not only ethical.
Stakeholders (passive users) will have Friedman's free lunches on cost of active users.
Btw, maybe monetarists were simply closer to digital gold concept, who knows...
Anyway, such pathological system definitely is not a part of Satoshi's vision. That's painly clear.
Stakeholders (passive users) will have Friedman's free lunches on cost of active users.
Not so. Hodlers' money can't be moved without their signature even in the case of a 51% attack. The miners protect the active users, therefore it's fitting that they should pay for it.
Anyway, such pathological system definitely is not a part of Satoshi's vision. That's painly clear.
Check out "The Book of Satoshi", chapter 5 "The 51% attack", verse... umm... verses are not numbered yet: "Even if a bad guy does overpower the network, it's not like he's instantly rich. All he can accomplish is to take back money he himself spent, like bouncing a check." ... etc
reply
reply