I'm still not sold that disinflation is better than regular ol' inflation (ala 1% / 2% in perpetuity) but it serves as a useful tool to replace lost coins and keep the total float in the tens of millions.
the problem with an exponential growing monetary supply is that the coin isn't good for a store of value function.
inflation of 1% annually means that the number coins is doubled every 70 years.
If inflation % slowly goes down, you know that the next year the coin value will be diluted less than the previous year.
If coin has an exponential monetary base, every year the same value needs to be absorbed by the market. It never goes down.
Think about gold... Is it is a store of value because the amount is limited? not really imho, it is because each year less and less gold can be digged up. We know that some asteroids contain gold. If we manage to get that gold, the price will drop. but the total number of gold in the universe is still finite...
Imho the best distribution is a coin with a fixed block reward:
img snip
edit: the "1COIN" is a hypothetical coin that has 1 coin as block reward every minute.
There is something peculiar about these charts because the literal number of coins is fairly arbitrary. In the long term XMR and 1COIN are exactly the same right? But that is not apparent from the charts at all.
true
In the long run, it is about the same. the only difference is the big inflation at the start.
If we want to compare the 18.4 million moneroj at the start with 1COIN, we need to devide that number by the permanent block reward (0.3 XMR)
So 18400000/0.3 = 61333333 is the equivalent number of 1COINs
This number is an equivalent of 61333333/(60*24*365.25) =~ 117 years of 1COIN-emission. Monero does this in 8 years.
So after about 109 years in 1COIN, the situation is the same: same inflation % as XMR and going down every year with the same rate.
Whether we can sell this "initial fast mining" to the public or not is yet to be seen. I hope we can.
In any case it is clear that XMR distribution is one of the most fair out there. it's not an instamine, not a premine, not a PoS scam, not an ICO
The "fast" mined coins are all bought at the market, and most of the time for pretty high prices, especially at the start
The
public bought into the same type of distribution with bitcoin, so I don't think its a concern.
Some of the public has. Most hasn't.Ultimately, there's no telling what will really work out the best. The theoretical 1coin has serious inflationary problems for early adopters, thus there is no incentive to be part of the initial effort of crafting the technology and infrastructure. In a world where cryptocurrencies are commonplace, and everyone's mining on their phones and TVs, then perhaps a 1coin distribution would be possible. But would the worlds most powerful supercomputer (the bitcoin network) had been built in a matter of 2 years by the conglomerate effort of random actors with the knowledge that bitcoins would be emitted forever? I don't know.
I agree with most of this. Not just the mining network either. A lot of work on all aspects of the ecosystem and promotion were done by countless people with all sorts of different backgrounds, social networks, and personal assets, all motivated by the urgency of being an early adopter. If inflation continues (in a sense) unabated for decades then there no such urgency.
underlined:
http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=XBTgranted, its CNN money, but my point is that the
some that has adopted it as real are significant. But I'm just piddling over semantics here.
re: second paragraph -
indeed, and I feel this is why Monero supports find themselves so vocal - blame the emission curve.
I wonder if the winklevoss twins would be receptive to Monero. if they understand the potential of bitcoin, surely they would understand the potential of Monero.