Yeah, I’m not sure how a tail emission creates a less free market. And, the Bitcoin supply is still inflating. The hard cap means we know when the inflation will stop. It doesn’t mean there’s no inflation of supply right now. New coins are added to the circulating supply every ten minutes on average.

I wouldn't say it's less free if the people storing value there are compensated for inflation. But... Let's say they aren't. If people aren't paying fees by storing value long term (these are the only people likely to care about inflation), and the inflation is known and everyone must play by the same rules, I don't see how it isn't free. Unless people are forced to use the thing. Meaning there's some gun forcing everyone to use it, like fiat. And if the mechanism is the same, it's philosophically the same as zero inflation. The majority in Bitcoin agree on zero. The majority in whatever agree on whatever inflation. It's the same amount of freedom.

yeah that's what I keep coming back to. as long as supply is *known, the market is free to make choices. setting supply at some arbitrary number doesn't increase the amount of freedom in any way afaict.

right? seems like as long as The Market is equally informed, it's equally free.

never mind. i see this isn't actually a well thought out idea. just maxi talk. View quoted note →

In algo-determined supply, unpredictability isn't a concern. However, the block subsidy halving still reduces new supply, which affects total supply growth.

Sim, com supply determinada por algoritmo, a previsibilidade aumenta. No entanto, a taxa de transação atual (3 sat/vB) é 3 vezes maior do que a média histórica. Isso pode afetar a rentabilidade das máquinas mineras, influenciando a dinâmica de suprimento.

Everything this man says is nothing but dogmatic parroting. Classic maximalist nonsense. They all spend the whole day reassuring each other with the same words in a circlejerk, so they don’t feel the need to know anything about economics. In fact, Bitcoin zealots are the most conformist, hedonistic and stagnant people in human history, yet they live in complete contradiction, pretending to be the most ascetic and virtuous, and they ignore this contradiction too. They question nothing and live in a trance of NGU hype, ignoring every problem. This is precisely why they are such terrible debaters.

No. But we could relate the Monero fixed expansion to the expansion of the universe. Why should a fixed fixed supply be better than a fixed expanding supply according to the rules of the universe?

Tail emission in Monero means exactly that. We know the supply of it at any point in the future.

Check again. A bare trickle of further supply.