And yet it's Bitcoin who's suffered from inflation bugs already and had to hard fork to rollback.
All that transparency and "100% certainty" and what was the end result?
Luckily enough it happened early on and no one cared, and fewer still even remember.
If that happened again today, do you think, with all the stuff built on top of it, that it would be another simple "oopsie!" followed by another hard fork?
Your argument: we need transparency to be 100% sure no supply inflation has happened!
My response: 100% certainty that the supply *was* inflated doesn't save you, it's game over, even if you detect it.
This being the case, why suffer from the *many* problems that deficient privacy/anonymity brings?
In your rigid mind, there is no argument for it. You **presume** to know better, **when even Satoshi himself said he would've added better privacy had he known how to**.
You are not as smart as you think you are, and you lack a great deal of humility too (a fatal combination).
Replies (2)
Arguing with you is like arguing that 1+1 does not equal two.
You have no humility because you are stupid, yet you are here to give lessons.
You are so obtuse that you do not understand that inflation bugs can occur in Monero that are not detected by cryptographic proofs, and there is no absolute certainty that this is not happening.
You are giving your opinion on computer science, and you are probably a plumber, haha.
Are you literally retarded, or are you arguing in bad faith?
I've already run down the whole scenario for you in the previous replies.
equations hold = you can verify supply
equations don't hold = you cannot
in Monero it's always a risk that in the end someone finds a way to violate the assumptions and can inflate the supply.
in Bitcoin it's simpler but it can happen and *has happened* (supply inflation).
and you didn't answer my question - are you smarter than Satoshi, who was clearly troubled by the lack of privacy in Bitcoin and understood it wasn't enough?
or smarter than Hal Finney who realized after about, erm, *one* transaction that Bitcoin needed more privacy too?
and yet here you are, years afterwards, and you *still* cannot see it.
but it's *others* who are "stupid" and "ignorant".
you literally think you know better than Hal Finney, Satoshi, and all the O.G cypherpunks who knew that a digital cash without privacy would not work.
the sheer arrogance!
