Topic: Open Letter to GMaxwell and Sincere Rational Core Devs - page 12. (Read 34840 times)

Your use of the term "Ideal Money" does not match the use of that term in this thread.  That is why you are confused.  You think when we say "Ideal Money" we are saying some subjective notion of what is "ideal money" to you.  That is not the case.  "Ideal Money" in this thread means a very specific mathematically defined term, kind of like "perfect circle".

You are the dumbest person in this thread, possibly on this forum, and acting dumber isn't going to change that or distract people from being aware of this.

Up thread, answer, no.

You still think that Nash was Satoshi Nakamoto?

Think about what I have done here by bringing this to the community and the worlds attention (to the best of my ability).  I have fought hard through all the chaos to bring awareness to this because levation a stable metric of value is the greatest technological leap we can conceive of.  You wouldn't believe the trolling ignorance and conflict I have faced, just trying to get others aware of it...

And then think of how you are spending YOUR time.

You don't know what the word deflation means.

It's really refreshing to read of another person that has a general understanding of Ideal Money.  Thanks its been lonely otherwise.

Bitcoin is not only predictable at the current state, but it will have a ZERO deflation rate from 2140 on until forever. Fees will then be the only reason for miners to support the network and this will end up in a near production cost (energy) value, which still makes Bitcoin a candidate for a pretty close - or even better, because decentralized - concept of Ideal Money.

I don't see any of the current governments able to create some sort of Ideal Money anytime soon. This probably could only be created by a world government, which might not have a reason to do so, because they could simply prohibid any other competitor to their own currency.

exactly im very surprised that people aren't understanding this.. people do not know how a market works or something? I think the governments have done a good job in brainwashing people into puppets that is for sure!

I do not believe you need a one world government or even one winner in the battle for the most ideal money.  We can have many different governments using a probably smaller set of currencies all competing with each other to be the most ideal currency.  There might be a single winner that wipes out all the other currencies but I don't think that is a foregone conclusion.

Btw. Bitcoin is here, real and now.

Ideal money is not and it will not be anytime soon. At least not until we have a one world government.

The reason I am still in this thread is that the theory is that we don't have to force the governments/central banks to do anything.  The theory is that market forces will do the forcing for us.  I like that because it does not rely on us getting them to do anything - that is never going to happen, ever.

So "ideal money" is money that perfectly accounts for the economy and maintains this accounting without gaining or losing value relative to the economy (no inflation or deflation).  Perfection here is not possible.

Bitcoin will always be gaining in value but at a predictable enough rate due to its design.  

This behavior, through market forces, will force all the inflationary fiat money to asymptotically approach "ideal money" while always being inflationary with an inflation rate approaching but never quite becoming 0%.  All fiat currencies will have a choice to either become honest money or die at the hands of the existence of honest money.

We end up with one money for saving with a low transaction rate and one money for day to day transactions with a high transaction rate - is how I understand it.

You really should go back and read the whole thread.  You are unlikely to have any questions that have not already been answered, or at least discussed.

Oh, ok.  Good luck with that.  Trying to force the government or really the central banks, e.g. the Fed, into certain monetary policies like trying make their fiat currencies approach Nash's ideal is ok with me.  Not sure how that will go but please go right ahead and try.

How close (approaching asymptotically or otherwise) must a currency be to ideal to be called ideal?  Once it is deemed ideal then what?  If it ever moves again then it wasn't actually ideal, was it?

The OP's argument is that, while Bitcoin cannot itself be an ideal currency, it CAN, under some circumstances, serve to force fiat currencies to approach Nash's ideal currency asymptotically.  That is what this thread is about - not whether Bitcoin is or should be an ideal currency.

I know that.  I'm yanking the poor guy's leg.  It isn't nice of me to do so but I failed to get a rise out of him so it's ok.

Bitcoin cannot be an ideal currency.  Neither can any other currency.  So?  Who needs ideal?  If anyone one is left standing their ground on they believe any currency or Bitcoin can be ideal then who are we to disturb their thoughts?

Statistically your risk reward favors you to not trade until you have figured this out for yourself.. unless you have some kind of inside info or 10 years experience trading swings

While folks gravitate toward something there's profits to be made.  I just want movement.  If some standard basket of goods and services is ever pegged at a certain amount of Bitcoin forever (unlikely in the extreme) then so be it; I will find movement elsewhere.

Believe in Bitcoin like a religious belief all you want; it's ok with me.  I too believe in something; I just don't feel the need to believe that Bitcoin needs to approach any sort of ideal currency.  That Bitcoin is better in some aspects than fiat is just fine with me.  I am pretty sure government fiat currencies are better than Bitcoin in plenty of situations.  For me, Bitcoin does not have to be the one and only currency (stable or otherwise).  In fact, I feel very confident that there will always be many currencies over time.  If anything there are going to be more and more currencies.  So, inspired, I might just run off and create a new currency (oh, wait, I already did that decades ago) -- it was great until my wife cornered the market and cause a crises.

Mr. Rabahy, If you would actually read this thread you keep replying to, you would notice that the OP has stated many times in this thread that Bitcoin literally CANNOT be ideal currency, as it is inherently deflationary, and thus cannot maintain stable value over time.

You should because that's what the market will gravitate to sooner or later. Ideal money is at the heart of the matter for any currency that ever has or ever will exist. As technology lets us leap into more knowledgeable territory to offer solutions leading to asymptotically more ideal forms of money we will be closer to a form of money that centralized parties have no control over and thus serves bitcoin's sole intention, whilst it may or may not be bitcoin it should try to strive to be asymptotically more ideal than fiat just because a central body cannot print according to a personal schedule however any benefits to be had from that decision may or may not be better than a hardcoded schedule that does not follow economic metrics (other than the obvious incentivesized push to increase energy efficiency rewarded by block rewards). The only thing bitcoin has going for it from an ideal money perspective is that through an indirection we can relate this race to increase energy efficiency as a metric to the rewards one gets for those ahead of their peers. I'm not so sure though that qualifies as a inflation/deflation metric that will drive economic growth and prosperity through peaks and troughs of confidence cycles, although you never know. Far likely that a metric that shifts supply based on work on the blockchain is a more direct and valid metric to determine economic growth and balance confidence to achieve smoother growth patterns, and indeed that is the path I have chose in my developments.