Don't forget Dr. Antal Fekete's point which is that gold has the highest above ground stocks to velocity ratio of any commodity on earth — money is more complicated than just debasement, e.g. the "supply" of money is multivariate at least depending on both the rate of emission and exchange. His point being that the marginal-utility-to-hoard of gold was nearly constant. By now, I've come to realize that is a negative property of a unit-of-exchange and a positive property of a store-of-value, thus congruent with how gold is employed by society.

See I don't think governments enforce interest rates nor currencies on us[1]. We the People get the government we economically ask for.

Dr. Fekete is another whom I debated extensively in email.

[1]

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/03/07/interesting-questions-for-gold/ Quote from: Armstrong Whatever you call money will always fluctuate in purchasing power because there is a business cycle. Any attempt to flat-line that will be futile for that is precisely what Marx tried to do – stop the cycle. Gold will always rise and fall if it is a free market or money fixed by weight or value. By the way, Florence had a two-tier monetary system using gold internationally and silver domestically. The two moved opposite, the workers felt cheated, they rioted and burned down the banker’s homes in Florence. It was a huge riot and that was a system based upon weight. The value still rose and fell.

So supply increases when economic production increases; because I presume debt is driving the expansion thus uneconomic mining becomes ephemerally plausible due to debt misallocation.

One way that could be emulated with crypto-currency would be to adjust the emission rate of new coins relative to the proportion of the total coin supply transacted per unit time, and the transaction fee would need to be higher than what could be gained by miners from sending transactions to themselves to inflate the metric.

I think investors might accept increased debasement when (the real, not faked) proportional transaction rate is higher, because this should correlate with increased adoption and value per the Metcalf Law correlation between market cap and usage that Peter R charted (verified) for Bitcoin. That is actually an interesting idea but needs more thought and study.

I can't intake orally anything with sugar or chocolate since I became chronically ill roughly since 2009 or 2010.

Guys that discussion was sloppy and got out-of-hand. And the 3 of us don't have enough free time to do it scholarly and precisely. Our one liners got misinterpreted, e.g. my "cathedrals vs. bazaars" was misinterpreted (by iCEBREAKER) to presume I was asserting there is no organizational structure in the world which wasn't my intended point. Partially my fault because I really shouldn't be doing this discussion at this time.

I just want to add a point I thought of while eating at McDonalds (no other choice at 4am).

Most Libertarian readers probably dislike debasement because they want private property rights respected (in addition to not wanting the debasement to end up in the hands of the fiat masters).

However, there is no private property that doesn't have depreciation and maintenance costs (exception for precious metals but you still have to expend resources to guard them?). So why should a monetary claim on real capital be the only thing in the world that never depreciates? Even if you held the real capital as private property instead of the monetary claim, you would not avoid depreciation and maintenance so why should the monetary claim offer frictionless holding that the claimed asset can't?

An unanswered question is how to calculate the optimum debasement rate?

rpietila, what goal could variable emission of new coins solve or optimize? I've seen some mention smoothing the price volatility, but I am skeptical of that.

I don't want to get into another long discussion, but if anyone has an ideas, I am interested to read them.

On a final note, one thing we can surely agree on is that investors will never prefer a debased currency, all other factors being equal. As a corollary, I don't think a currency could gain adoption if the adopters care about debasement and are aware of it, all other factors being equal.

As usual, underlined text means the reader should pay special attention to it.

You can invent any interpretation that you want, but it doesn't mean that was the intended meaning of my writings.

I wrote here about a serious concern for the world. You turn it into a petty ego battle. Sorry I am not responsible for you. You are responsible for your actions.

Yes of course.

I was only addressing what Bitcoin is today, not the ramifications and future.

We don't know yet if Bitcoin is Napster though. Gnutella survived, Napster didn't.

I am exasperated at the petty devolution of a serious concern about the world into a petty ego contest.

My gosh the jealousy of 5 year olds throwing sand when they think I am boasting my Tonka has 18 wheels and implying theirs is only a pickup. But I never did pick that fight. They came after me to do the hatchet job.

I shouldn't have to explain that time doesn't have a 0% cost. That should be obvious. There is no excuse for wasting my time, then trying to blame me for trying to explain what should be obvious in the first place!

Sheesh.

P.S. One can argue that an investor already has a time opportunity cost for delaying investing (regardless of any debasement cost), because his/her lifespan is not eternal. But that doesn't address the fact that an investor that has everything he can buy may have lost some urgency (or may piss away his time getting drunk or masturbating to porn) nor that an investor can bury (save) money, then expect to consume it at full value (if no debasement) 50 years later which retards development. It incentivizes people to think in terms of constant rates of return from bonds, which is the antithesis of development. Passive investment is the bane of human civilization, because the passive investor does not maximize knowledge production, banks and bond investors only care about collateral (not about maximum ROI) and thus get a parasitic rent on those who are actually in the trenches figuring out how to organize and produce. A retirement or insurance fund can't invest in stocks because they have to be able to actuarially account for the projected needs of the fund thus require guaranteed investments. But guaranteed anything is  synonymous with failure (I think aminorex is smart enough to understand why without me spelling it out), which all of us will soon observe globally in spades starting 2015.75 with the sovereign debt BIG BANG (they are guaranteed right?).

If the above makes no sense to you, I don't have time to write a long essay to go through all the angles of it in great detail.

This is why I think we come to a point in economy, where talking is cheap and useless. Results dictate correctness, not theory.

I was prepared to leave it (to quit talking and silently work on results) before iCEBREAKER came in to attempt an unprovoked hatchet job on me.

I am exasperated at the petty devolution of a serious concern about the world into a petty ego contest.

My gosh the jealousy of 5 year olds throwing sand when they think I am boasting my Tonka has 18 wheels and implying theirs is only a pickup. But I never did pick that fight. They came after me to do the hatchet job.

Someone has reading comprehension deficiency.

Suddenly? Have you not noticed the year 2020 on the subject of the thread mofo?

Why do you get to slobber all over my thread?

And 2015.75 is still the apex or inflection point of the sovereign debt BIG BANG. Nothing has changed since the thread was started.

Of course not. So why don't you search for a more plausible interpretation. Why do I have to spell it out for you? First means being first on a more general trend of merging social media with investing. I am a reductionalist. I think in generalized and abstract terms.

You not only didn't listen, you didn't even think. You are so lazy.

P.S. I edited my prior post.

P.S.S. Just as I advised rpietila not to buy the €1 million mansion/castle/decayed thing, I also advised Hommel not to double-down on failure by buying the $1 million mansion, spoiling his wife, and making her pregnant. I told him that troubled couples make a baby just before the upending of it all. I warned rpietila about the Russia threat looming for Estonia et al. I cautioned him about the defocusing effects of wealth. He is obviously a big boy and can make his own decisions.

I was also still talking to Jason during his troubles and encouraging him to prioritize getting out of depression and off the alcohol. Both of which apparently he has accomplished. I don't communicate often with him. Perhaps bimonthly via email.

AFAIK, Jason is raising the kids now. But I don't know all the details. I know when ever I called him, he was distracted with the kids and appears to put a lot of time/effort into loving and educating them.

I promised Jason not to reveal private things about his life, so I think I can't say too much.

You are all politics and no substance. Your ego is so hurt because I (unintentionally) humiliated your idol aminorex. In fact, you made it worse by forcing me to admit that I did. I wasn't going to rub his face in it, but you did!


As AnonyMint I regularly criticized Freicoin (and Inflatacoin) in this forum. There are numerous problems. And their philosophy is Communist. You are too far from the details to understand that debasement does not come in just one flavor.

But I don't really care what any readers here think, because the only way I see to make a crypto-currency scale will involve never selling it to you and your ilk who are just in to profit on the greater fool theory of investing. It will involve a totally different strategy and design that is so far from anything you have even conceived of, that I am just laughing at you.

Seriously get off my lawn! You are an annoying idiot.


You didn't understand anything. Thus you didn't point out anything.


Am I supposed to be jealous? Obviously you are jealous of aminorex. If I were him, your feeble patronization would make me puke and want to cast you away from me.

I don't even drink. I have absolutely no interest in cigars, mansions, expensive bottles of liquor, rolls royces, etc.. I understand your point is that he has excess monetary capital to optimize his work environment (although I fail to see how being drunk will help him be healthy and be more productive, I'd rather just go run the mountain which is nearly free).

But that is irrelevant. It doesn't make him omniscient. He has been more productive than me since 2002 when I stopped programming. I basically haven't worked since 2002, until just recently trying to crank the gears back to on, but not so easy given I got used to not working.

I am not claiming aminorex is not smart. It is obvious that he is erudite. But that doesn't always substitute for a strongly reductionist visual IQ that I have. I am not so erudite, I am a sloppy writer, etc.. You won't easily detect my intellect. God seems to have given me the attributes that my intellect is easily obfuscated. Maybe it is a figment of my imagination too eh?  

Point is, I am just here discussing an issue with aminorex. I wasn't trying to frame the discussion as an IQ contest. You did. I just wanted to address whether 0% time cost is insane or not.


Because you don't understand that I am Hommel's first and #1 critic. And I disagreed with him about almost everything. Yet I also am honest about when I learn something so fundamentally genuis from a man who didn't even himself understand the all the implications of what he taught me (and thus made many mistakes himself). Hommel has weaknesses (as we all do), but he also had a few generative essence insights which were astounding.

I guess you didn't realize that rpietila was also formerly weakly associated with Jason Hommel too. I met him on Hommel's forum, which BTW I had suggested Hommel create. If Hommel had listened to me and allowed more user comments, he could have been the first ZeroHedge. If he had not locked down the forum, it could have been the first bitcointalk. We were out in the front with my usual lead. But he couldn't understand hitech.

What a useless blob if you don't think you have anything to offer which aminorex can't do.

I know for a fact I can do things he can't do. And vice versa.


Aliasing error. Take the measurement again in a year. Besides I am not poor when measured in knowledge and ability. I am poor in health, which has been the major factor in my non-production. The other is wasting time on idiot, non-constructive, jealous obstructionists.


I regularly found errors in aminorex's posts, especially when he makes statements about crypto-currency, but I don't usually bother to point them out (because it is a waste of my time!).


There has not been any such failure.

2015.75 is the start of the BIG BANG. It is when the USA reaches the top of its current up trajectory and starts to head down. It doesn't mean we will all be starving and shivering in the dark in October. It will take some years for the collapse to ensue and amplify in effect.

Armstrong has been saying since 2012, when he correctly predicted the capital flows to return to the dollar, that US stock market phase transition could be delayed into the 2015.75 - 2017 timeframe. He had often stated that he would not know the answer until the closing of 2014. Exactly as he predicted, the market gave him this answer with the Treasury bonds elected THREE YEARLY REVERSAL signals.

Thus he now knows the phase transition will first be in Treasury bonds to peak 2015.75, then we enter the BIG BANG of sovereign debt collapse.

STFU mofo.

It seems then that your rationale for 0% debasement was it was the only way to attract the adopters of the currency. Satoshi did prove that mentioning gold in the whitepaper has attracted that initial burst of adoption from those goldbugs who are also technically inclined. Clever marketing as better gold, because even gold has 1 - 2% debasement.

But I don't (yet) submit to the conclusion of it is the only way. I have ideas to experiment with (first).

iCEBREAKER is trying to obfuscate (hide) the slamdunk point that 0% cost of time is insanity.

OMG! Back peddling!

1. First they ignore you.
2. Then they attack you.
3. Then they join you.

Devastating intelligence  


Btw, in case any one didn't get the point upthread.

Money is claims on real capital. If claims on real capital are withheld from the market when money is stored rather than invested/spent, then some real capital has been delayed. If that delay was wise, then society benefits, but if it was mistaken then society suffers. But no one can know a priori (in advance) the outcome of decision to delay. If we allow delays to be unbounded in time without any cost, then the potential cost to society is infinite, while the incentives placed on the investor are misaligned, because the investor doesn't factor in any time cost.

Study the game theory of that, and you will note it diverges into the antithesis of prosperity. Real world historical examples include hoarding gold plummeting the velocity of money into a Dark Age. The velocity of money is already down -30% in the past 16 years.

The holder of monetary capital (a.k.a. investor) must have some time cost to his delayed deployment, otherwise he can not rationally weigh the costs that society pays for his delay in the case he is wrong about his preference.

Correct. It was an ass whipping. Not that I intended it to be so humiliating, but it is not my fault if the other side is so weak.


Got to love aminorex's 0% cost of time, as if we live forever, opportunity cost has no time component, time is perpetually free, and perpetual motion machines exist.

Definitely genius.    

I guess it takes one to know on eh?   You two can be peas in a pod.

Yw.


The catch-22 dilemma for upstart crypto-currency is that the early adopters are speculators whose reason for adoption is appreciation of the purchasing power of the currency. They are not adopting it because it has the widest use as a currency. Yet (in terms of rate of scaling given by the Metcalf squaring law of network effects) the population-at-large adopts a currency for the latter reason. Thus crypto-currency has stagnated. There is a chasm between the two modes and incremental approaches will not cross the chasm before outside forces overtake the slow moving morass (there is that non-0% time cost again), e.g. Coinbase and Paypal will basterdize Bitcoin into an off-chain fractional reserve system given they will have most of the "mom-and-pop" (and grandma) speculation "monkey see, monkey do" (stupid jealously) adopters on the next bubble uptrend (after 2015.75). Speculation adoption (greater fool theory mass mania) markets are fundamentally different than currency adoption (mass rationality of trading through a common fungible language) markets.

I have an idea how to solve this dilemma. I shared it with smooth in PM a couple of months ago. You can ask him.

Please note I am not coding an altcoin at the moment. Since November I have been coding an Android app (currently at the equivalent to 5000 lines of Java code milepost) which is yet unreleased.

And the more I talk in forums, the more coding I don't do.

So hopefully I made my philosophies clear enough by now and can go back to being a coder and not teacher and debater. I love teaching and sharing ideas, because it helps me learn and refine them. But I also love being a coder. The two disciplines are incongruent simultaneously, in terms of excellence at either one, because they both require enormous dedication of time (heck I was writing in these forums for 18 hours nonstop yesterday!). Excellence requires focus. I have become an excellent forum debater and idea promulgator (although still not an excellent writer), but this has come at the cost of losing my excellence (focus) as a coder.

I think it is time to flip the switch back.

Anything critically important we need to discuss?