One week later, Wallet of Satoshi is gone from the USA app stores. Were you ready, anon? Are you still “onboarding” people with a banking app they may not be able to access in the future? View quoted note →

Folks who continue to use Wallet of Satoshi (and recommend its use) would do well to write down some guesses about these three scenarios (rug, shotgun, honeypot). How likely is each, and how does the sum probability of those three dire scenarios compare to a graceful WoS exit or ongoing functionality? It’s called risk management. You either do this, or reality does it for you. View quoted note →

Common argument: 1. Halvings introduce no new information about supply. 2. If so, halvings cannot influence price. 3. Therefore, halvings cannot influence price (1 and 2). I think halvings are priced in, but reject both premises. Against 1: halvings can introduce new information about supply. They show, with certainty, what was before only expected to some high degree -- that new supply coming to market will soon dramatically click downward. Against 2: halvings can also introduce new information, not about supply, but about demand. What if you discover, time and again, that people quite stupidly respond to halvings by buying? The first few times, that's new information! And when it stops, that's new information too! Why do I think halvings are still priced in? Because they're *now* priced in. These effects are known, and known to be known, and negligible after the first few halvings.

I knew the Bank of Lebanon was no good. But until today, I didn't know quite how no good. They didn't just print too much money. Officials embezzled from the bank, invested in Ponzi schemes, and then lied and printed to cover it all up. Result: Lebanese Pound down 98% vs. USD. There are a lot of sources that go into more detail on this, and the story isn't over yet. For one recent overview, see:

dw.com

How Lebanon was plundered by its own central bank

The 30-year tenure of the former governor of the Bank of Lebanon Riad Salameh culminated in controversy, inquiries and sanctions. What role did the...

When the World Bank released a report about your monetary and fiscal system entitled "Ponzi Finance?" you know you messed up:

World Bank

Lebanon’s Ponzi Finance Scheme Has Caused Unprecedented Social and Economic Pain to the Lebanese People

Public finance in post-civil war Lebanon has been an instrument for systematic capture of the country’s resources, as it served the interests of ...

One interesting element of this particular case is how authorities across monetary, banking, financial, and fiscal systems conspired to create a crisis. And 'create' is not an exaggeration, according to the World Bank. They call it a ‘Deliberate Depression’.

“Whoever knowingly makes or intentionally spends counterfeit money shall be separated from the communion of the faithful as one accursed, an oppressor of the poor and a disturber of the state” Lateran 1, Canon 13 (15 in some numberings), 1123 AD What’s interesting to me isn’t just that counterfeiting is singled out for condemnation — it’s that one of the reasons given is that it amounts to oppression of the poor. These guys were onto something. “How, exactly, do counterfeit bills oppress the poor?” is a good question. Think about it, and you may come to some unexpected conclusions!

I'm working on a taxonomy of digital goods — especially rivalrous, excludable ones that can be transferred. What are paradigm cases or important kinds to keep track of? How would you add to a list like this? - domain names - digital dollars, debts, bonds - NFTs - gaming assets (skins, etc.) - bitcoin (of course) - ether Some key properties I'm keeping track of include marginal cost of production, non-monetary (use) value, cash flow, aesthetic value, possible Veblen status, mode of issuance/creation, and self-custody. What else comes to mind?

Make Cash Great Again — pentuple reporting thresholds and bring back or mint new supernotes ($500, $1,000, even $10,000 denominations)