4 ms·

> there _is_ an infinite amount of any linearly emitted $COIN The amount emitted at any time is not only finite, but limited by time, with the yearly supply in

by tromp 4y ago

> there _is_ an infinite amount of any linearly emitted $COIN The amount emitted at any time is not only finite, but limited by time, with the yearly supply inflation going down toward 0. There's no essential difference with a capped supply [1]. [1] https://john-tromp.medium.com/a-case-for-using-soft-total-supply-1169a188d153 https://john-tromp.medium.com/a-case-for-using-soft-total-su...

atweiden 4y ago
A tail emissions rate of 0.03% or less annually seems acceptable. #!/usr/bin/env raku use v6; multi sub inflate($n, $r, $y) { my $m = $n; loop (my $i = 0; $i < $y; $i++) { $m = inflate($m, $r); } $m; } multi sub inflate($n, $r) { $n * (1 - $r); } sub MAIN(:$rate = 0.0003, :$years = 100) { my $purchasing-power = 1; my $inflate = inflate($purchasing-power, $rate, $years); my $output = qq:to/EOF/.trim; After $years years of inflation at a rate of {$rate * 100}% per year, purchasing power is {$inflate * 100}% of what it was initially. EOF $output.say; } All else equal, a 1% annual rate of inflation costs you over half of your purchasing power per century. Even a 0.1% yearly inflation rate charted out over several centuries results in a collapse of purchasing power. This level of inflation practically requires investors to take countermeasures, like searching for alternative stores of value... Expanding the supply on demand through on-chain governance in a way stakers can profit from, while sacrilege to “digital gold”, would be more palatable to me than rates of tail emission higher than 0.03% or so.
- dropnerd 4y ago
  is 0.03% enough incentive to secure a trustless network?
  - atweiden 4y ago
    I’m only commenting from the perspective of investors concerned over debasement. 0.03% annual inflation reduces purchasing power by about 7% every 250 years.

by tromp 4y ago

atweiden 4y ago

A tail emissions rate of 0.03% or less annually seems acceptable. #!/usr/bin/env raku use v6; multi sub inflate($n, $r, $y) { my $m = $n; loop (my $i = 0; $i < $y; $i++) { $m = inflate($m, $r); } $m; } multi sub inflate($n, $r) { $n * (1 - $r); } sub MAIN(:$rate = 0.0003, :$years = 100) { my $purchasing-power = 1; my $inflate = inflate($purchasing-power, $rate, $years); my $output = qq:to/EOF/.trim; After $years years of inflation at a rate of {$rate * 100}% per year, purchasing power is {$inflate * 100}% of what it was initially. EOF $output.say; } All else equal, a 1% annual rate of inflation costs you over half of your purchasing power per century. Even a 0.1% yearly inflation rate charted out over several centuries results in a collapse of purchasing power. This level of inflation practically requires investors to take countermeasures, like searching for alternative stores of value... Expanding the supply on demand through on-chain governance in a way stakers can profit from, while sacrilege to “digital gold”, would be more palatable to me than rates of tail emission higher than 0.03% or so.

dropnerd 4y ago
is 0.03% enough incentive to secure a trustless network?
- atweiden 4y ago
  I’m only commenting from the perspective of investors concerned over debasement. 0.03% annual inflation reduces purchasing power by about 7% every 250 years.