š
Original date posted:2022-07-11
š Original message:>
>
> Alternatively, losses could be at a predictable rate that's entirely
> different to the one Peter assumes.
>
No, peter only assumes that there *is* a rate.
Regardless of what the rate is, if it is any value for which there exists
*any fixed central tendency*, tail emission is *evenually* non inflationary.
But you are correct about the other two things:
1. If people are improving custody faster than 1/(N(t)*P) than tail
emission can still be inflationary. This seems far-fetched, imo.
2. The rate will be somewhat stochastic ("black swan envets"). Plausible
(popular wallet loses keys in coding error), but also... "true no matter
what". And not really relevant to tail-emission being non-inflationary.
Over a long enough time period, even these events can be factored into a
fixed central tendency. Even if it's 100 years, etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220711/451e1d28/attachment-0001.html>;
Erik Aronesty [ARCHIVE] /
npub1y2ā¦5taj0
2023-06-07 23:11:35
in reply to nevent1qā¦c68t
Author Public Key
npub1y22yec0znyzw8qndy5qn5c2wgejkj0k9zsqra7kvrd6cd6896z4qm5taj0Published at
2023-06-07 23:11:35Event JSON
{
"id": "989208603a9c378ebcdfc7b818a2610f018b45985b2d7981fcea77fac2044cce",
"pubkey": "22944ce1e29904e3826d25013a614e4665693ec514003efacc1b7586e8e5d0aa",
"created_at": 1686179495,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"58ba5412c6c2b5602710ac2f4e1819c2f92facaa3c9fa557b2ad25c78b5dd662",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"53641099305f6beaf3ea56deec427d05d9942ed8d934357af23930f74e9d7e21",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"805a3fcd58f8fda8ccfafde06f20b70f1eea6185bf60caf764201adc9743f5cf"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2022-07-11\nš Original message:\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Alternatively, losses could be at a predictable rate that's entirely\n\u003e different to the one Peter assumes.\n\u003e\n\nNo, peter only assumes that there *is* a rate.\n\nRegardless of what the rate is, if it is any value for which there exists\n*any fixed central tendency*, tail emission is *evenually* non inflationary.\n\nBut you are correct about the other two things:\n\n1. If people are improving custody faster than 1/(N(t)*P) than tail\nemission can still be inflationary. This seems far-fetched, imo.\n\n2. The rate will be somewhat stochastic (\"black swan envets\"). Plausible\n(popular wallet loses keys in coding error), but also... \"true no matter\nwhat\". And not really relevant to tail-emission being non-inflationary.\n Over a long enough time period, even these events can be factored into a\nfixed central tendency. Even if it's 100 years, etc.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220711/451e1d28/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "73d553f490a7b9b6943976121c9ab4a97de7c1dea85486d854f5dff311303d8e6dd69f597b43185622c458073a3126a68e84e62e9074d00bceba799be59e3bba"
}