We're talking about different concepts. "Fixed supply" can be taken to mean either: i) strictly the final supply count, or ii) the entire monetary policy I'm referring to the former. You're referring to the latter. I've written a thread on this:https://twitter.com/panekkkk/status/1017088333032378373 …
your speculation regarding bitcoin’s inability to do so are no less speculative as my speculation about its ability to do so
-
-
First of all, the burden of proof that it works are on you as you go around pitching Bitcoin as an investment to anyone. Secondly: http://randomwalker.info/publications/mining_CCS.pdf … Thirdly: Intuitively, how will it be secure if you won't pay the miners/security guards?
-
It's a valid approach to start w/ a fixed final supply and monitor the situation and if proves non-viable change it. But that's not the narrative being sold.
-
There are reasonable Q's around security w/ zero inflation so personally I think it's worth having those discussions but I understand that such discussions are uncomfortable and markets don't like uncertainty.
-
I take issue more w/ the fact that supply/issuance impact both protocol security and related game theory so any narrative around monetary economics alone is incomplete.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
