Topic: [ANN] AEON [2019-09-27: Upgrade to version 0.13.0.0 ASAP HF@1146200 Oct 25] - page 199. (Read 625666 times)

Yes, I like this for all of the reasons stated already !

I like the 8/9. You've got my vote for it.

Okay let's consider this an official proposal then, open for comments:

Fixed diff now available at http://52.8.47.33:8080/  


[edit] core was updated, front-end will be too but later (only comestic change, infos are already good)

Wow, 8/9% interest.  That is really fetching.  I like it. 
 
It has a ton of symbolic significance, equates to a decimal value of infinite 8's, even has some embedded math-jokes that call back to the original bitcoin itself (white paper in 2008, release in 2009), and i'm sure there's more that can be gleaned as we go. 
 
I really think we found our own "golden number" here.     
 

LOL, but not a bad idea.

Interesting fact. .88888... (infinite 8s -- what could be better than that?) = 8/9

I had no idea. 
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/888_%28number%29


Ok, since they are mathematically equivalent let's go with 0.888 then.  I am increasingly of the opinion if you can activate the same receptors that are drawn to faith and mysticism while also providing cold harded mathematical charity - so be it.  That is the best 'human' solution. 
 
Since China has been at the forefront of crypto mining and adoption so far, it makes sense to use a figure with significance to them, and apparently it even carries other significance as well.

.99999 percent (with a repeating decimal) inflation.      That will really give people something to argue about. 
 
But it's fine.  I think we should simply move with the idea at this point.  0.9%,  0.999~%,  whatever. 
 
It just can't be less than ~.85% because it should be *at least* as much as Monero itself. 
 
My thoughts on the matter are known.  I think we should close this discussion by the end of the week and commit to a course.

Inheriting Monero's parameters was implied here, as this coin was launched as an a pure (exact, other than branding) clone of Monero, and further my communication with the original developer when it was handed over strongly suggested that was intended. The only ambiguity comes from Monero's tail reward not having being implemented at the time this coin was launched, so the original forked code for this coin didn't have any tall reward at all. What was in the Monero design but unimplemented at the time (and somewhat ambiguous) was "less than 1%". I think it best that we keep within those parameters and not just make something up out of thin air a year and a half after launch.

Less than 1% can mean 1% for all practical purposes though. Just the slightest bit of rounding down is sufficient to satisfy <1%.

Because crypto is not just backed by math or cryptography, its monetary rules are set in stone, it can't be changed later.

1. can you see that at the moment is just proposed? most likely will not be definitive

2. if says after 8 years, the problem is that we can't be sure if after 8 years the coin will be still alive so why are you always thinking that far?

If you read the first post on this topic it says:

 
 
Please elaborate.  I feel like maybe there's something I'm not understanding.

For the sake of the social contract it can't be 1% or higher, anything equal or bellow 0,999% is valid.

I'm for 1% to 1.5% inflation--anything less is parroting Monero and anything more is parroting fiat. I like JM's idea for dynamic infaltion, but it has to be something that is workable and can be trusted to work as advertised before I could get behind it fully.

I agree that a 1995 style poll can't capture the true spirit of the community.  
  
For what it's worth, I also put my weight behind 1% inflation.  It's a flat, easy number, never seen before in any serious and major cryptocurrency (and I expect Aeon to become a staple of the Cryptonote world over the coming years).  I also think from everything I've read that those who are pro-inflation (and I haven't heard anyone who is really against the idea) will also agree this is a great compromise between debasement and mining incentive.  It also doesn't break the social contract imho.  
  
As far as Johnny Mneumonic's idea of smart inflation: if there is some revolutionary peer-reviewed economic mechanism invented in coming years which fits this description (and has been properly tested in mock economies in simulations) I think it might be worth examining.  For the time being we need to make a decision now that is time tested and provides us with the ideal fit of all variables and resources.  Satoshi didn't wait until cryptographic ring signatures could be integrated before launching bitcoin; he used what he had and launched the best money possible.  We should do the same.  We don't have any such "ideal variable inflation" in existence yet (if it is possible to even define formally), so all we can do is be open to the idea if it is invented down the road.  
  
I reiterate the move to a compounding 1% emission.  I've made an approximated chart (assuming the initial emission falls to 1% rate in 2022).  Here's what the curve will look like; as you can see - the effect is negligible over just a few short decades but provides some element of 'future proofing' (as a currency named aeon ought to do).  
  
 
  

Freicoin, iirc, used a tax-like debasement mechanism and worked on a fixed rate.

I agree that typical forms of inflation have already been experimented with, which is why a fixed X% accomplishes little more than, "look, this coin is inflationary!"

A smart-inflation like system would only increase the money supply as needed, meaning there would effectively be no inflation at all (outside of standard emission) until the coin started seeing greater transaction volumes.

TL;DR I'd rather see a dynamic "smart inflation" that doesn't exceed 1% (which is kind of pointless, but at least the mechanism would be in place) than a fixed 1%, which has been done before.

Also, I realize we haven't yet designed a system for making this work that cannot be gamed, but I have some ideas if it turns out to be something we wish to pursue.

Good points. On the bold, I suggested discussion, not a vote. These forum votes are a sham anyway. I will do exactly what you said: weigh input and make a decision.

1%.

Simple.

Elegant.

Make it so 

I like this idea of a 1% perpetual inflation. Money is memory. Inflation is forgetting and creates headroom for value creation.