Nick Szabo  🔑

well the double-spending was plausibly described in multiple threads as broadcast the transactions, and have a byzantine agreement protocol to keep it to a single view several times on the list even by 1998. and in that thread ^ you're saying the remaining problem is inflation.

we know now that controlling inflation is possible in a decentralised way via Bitcoin's mining difficulty adjustment. but I don't think anyone figured that out before despite exploring the problem for 10years +/- b-money & bit-gold approach were not that decentralised @NickSzabo4

at least my reaction to the mine via hashcash, broadcast transactions and byzantine consensus was on transaction ordering was: yes you could do that though broadcast sounds kind of inefficient, but we still needed to find an economic model that limits mining inflation somehow.

Byzantine agreement protocol's are all centralized; they aren't solutions to the problem I wanted to solve.

...and re: difficult adjustment, obviously one approach would be to create all the coins that would ever exist on day one and sell them. You don't strictly need continuous emission.

yes, and I proposed that (pre-created, though to illustrate a defective solution) as then you have the central issuer problem that plagues central-banks, or coins generally with no emission cost or significant pre-mining.

Why is there a central issuer problem? You can define the protocol so that issuance ends and/or only has a fixed quantity.

right but (in my example on one of the crypto lists) who wants to buy all rational numbers from me? why should I take the seigniorage? there is no fair way to do that. mining needs a cost to be fair.