pull down to refresh
To the point about asking dumb questions in public, I actually consider this one of my superpowers as an academic. Most of my colleagues seem to live in dread terror of appearing to not know something and the result is not learning a lot of new stuff or correcting their misconceptions.
Even when I've changed research fields, I feel like I surpass the baseline knowledge of most of the established experts pretty quickly, because I just ask every dumbass question that pops into my head (within reason).
Very true. It's the not always easy ability to let your guard down and ignore your own insecurities. What invariably happens to me in a bitcoin setting is this: I'm not a coder and will ask what I know is a dumb, basic technical question, and suddenly two experts will begin arguing between themselves about the answer. That always soothes my fragile ego.
It's a good ethos. I do the same thing IRL and have enjoyed similar benefits. Surprising extra benefit: other people love it when you do this and they gravitate toward you, presumably as some kind of authenticity signal.
Massively under-valued social skill, as long as you really mean it.
Dumb questions come naturally to me.
Although I should add: the Mises assertion is not entirely convincing to me.
I am convinced that any amount of divisible money could encode any amount of economic activity if it were properly distributed. I think that, in practice, the diffusion of money after a large enough deflationary jolt could prompt a wholesale replacement of that money in favor of another candidate money. I've mentioned this issue before from the perspective of the other direction (unequal distribution.)
My soul is not balmed on this point, but you can't have everything.
It sounds like you've received Mises' insight second or third-hand then. There are of course many caveats to it, but the argument was exactly along the lines of your statement.
Rest easy. It doesn't matter that the usable quantity of Bitcoin will always be shrinking.