George is a fellow OG but this is wrong. Bitcoin is seamlessly global, it does not and need not conform to the ideological speculations ("macroeconomic theories") of particular polities.https://twitter.com/GeorgeSelgin/status/1021553927324688386 …
-
-
While macroeconomic debates are very popular in the fiat central banking world, where monetary decisions are highly political, they are nevertheless ideological speculations not science.
Show this thread -
For these reasons, I strongly urge those developing or maintaining cryptocurrencies to focus on trust minimization and security. Protect holders against internally caused loss of value, but treat macroeconomic considerations with many grains of salt and very low priority.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Concur. Additionally I'd suggest the important difference isn't just "low vs high" but "predictable vs manipulable".
-
Won't predictability require, to some extent, an ability to respond to current conditions and thus be manipulable?
-
That's not the kind of predictability I meant. I think you mean predictable prices and interest rates? I meant basically non-manipulable money supply.
-
I can see predictable/non-manipulable new money creation, but I'm not so sure about the supply in general. That would require adjusting creation in response to a large-scale loss/destruction event, no?
-
You could require proof-of-life from old coins, and if they don't show in time then invalidate them and generate new coins.
So, yes. But this would be very predictable.
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.