1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
|
Return-Path: <earonesty@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A8FC002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:56:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B3538291A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:56:18 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 8B3538291A
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=q32-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com
header.i=@q32-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256
header.s=20210112 header.b=TfNHSfMn
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id dv9ApYvlLYkh
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:56:17 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 0AF9E82919
Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com
[IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::231])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AF9E82919
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:56:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id r9so6070114ljp.9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 05:56:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=q32-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=cGDGQTEblX1B+VfZzamSMkfuQgCHXDI2EQ2FcFy2fcg=;
b=TfNHSfMn44lgnb+IBzn6/CQksviryC01uym7wXgOWjlty9V+8qyYh9d3WEkVCSbjdd
D9erut+jTPjEbktV7+bn/ohZnBUsETHcoeL//m0SmxBXPOcRMKT4dK7iXFVG8m6eJovA
/IljgRkpQH13f0eIxoiHbUu50RZlfdTFaBEU219DDsWR/NZZbjeMvuP8nR7d0bYGBacA
p6J4WKYHkwFHpeymOVRsJMy1Yi/AyqjFC+XusA9dP2zsvqBe0JOiu1ralUV3s6l1STvH
k5iuvg4+MWD/KDD6lMoqfQ814O6SGDlbEO1u3fcRGBsFvDzu8555gZyqH57/MM/vcWv4
THvQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=cGDGQTEblX1B+VfZzamSMkfuQgCHXDI2EQ2FcFy2fcg=;
b=AqH6VkFhkJdx0ep+yzckCwMD8akrtEbJF7DvCeWeyKtnComHlsR38YX/0ShKSikIhQ
PXbAh1zsc/qjugID1ZokJ+TBJ/qqxzMN0HKqArzbzxBb08J40UlP+oT5yxXApAbm74R1
JpPWg0MndRrcCT2AanFYQsuCOTY5Iz1ZpcJHGmI8+CU9dfMg0zH9sW0MiQodtyLMIvca
3nKWtA93DxnqlD/vgJD209yrRmXkmdihXcpOLWqJVNA5EJkz0hydHZE43W9ZNRtpME5c
jHz0gQ5hRoiBW9BhGYLEEgo315r8oGB2CZ3CuKYgWG79TOqT8GL72+5IkYPpV2gWRrZY
qIdw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+LA7J7nVEBKQt69V4JT4g3KERrjPvccCd6NATtrUBIZyMmweuh
rKJieCUspc0xNr3lMTB4Qf3QruIztGNj5BQs+w99jcQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1thPdE061meLit9jZdU7l4XhrUkkcFwtWawYFug4snfdRrxCq43Xf9/d/TSQUXOO686QO+63EYem8elwEEHHFo=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:bd0e:0:b0:253:c481:d1bd with SMTP id
n14-20020a2ebd0e000000b00253c481d1bdmr9967974ljq.154.1657544174429; Mon, 11
Jul 2022 05:56:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Ysl4t9K8lfxRSsNM@petertodd.org>
<20220711023247.GA21856@erisian.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20220711023247.GA21856@erisian.com.au>
From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 08:56:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJowKgLDXr1ycGzCqRTe=iA_SQkchd1D4gtDD6o4gnK4dyn5dQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b76d5405e3871328"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 13:59:03 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Surprisingly, Tail Emission Is Not Inflationary
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:56:18 -0000
--000000000000b76d5405e3871328
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>
> Alternatively, losses could be at a predictable rate that's entirely
> different to the one Peter assumes.
>
No, peter only assumes that there *is* a rate.
Regardless of what the rate is, if it is any value for which there exists
*any fixed central tendency*, tail emission is *evenually* non inflationary.
But you are correct about the other two things:
1. If people are improving custody faster than 1/(N(t)*P) than tail
emission can still be inflationary. This seems far-fetched, imo.
2. The rate will be somewhat stochastic ("black swan envets"). Plausible
(popular wallet loses keys in coding error), but also... "true no matter
what". And not really relevant to tail-emission being non-inflationary.
Over a long enough time period, even these events can be factored into a
fixed central tendency. Even if it's 100 years, etc.
--000000000000b76d5405e3871328
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quot=
e" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204)=
;padding-left:1ex"><br>Alternatively, losses could be at a predictable rate=
that's entirely<br>different to the one Peter assumes.<br></blockquote=
><div><br></div><div>No, peter only assumes that there *is* a rate.=C2=A0=
=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Regardless of what the rate is, if it is an=
y value for which there exists *any fixed central=C2=A0tendency*, tail emis=
sion is *evenually* non inflationary.</div><div><br></div><div>But you are =
correct about the other two things:</div><div><br></div><div>1. If people a=
re improving custody faster than 1/(N(t)*P) than tail emission can still be=
inflationary.=C2=A0 This seems far-fetched, imo.</div><div><br></div><div>=
2. The rate will be somewhat stochastic ("black swan envets").=C2=
=A0 Plausible (popular wallet loses keys in coding error), but also... &quo=
t;true no matter what".=C2=A0 And not really relevant to tail-emission=
=C2=A0 being non-inflationary.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Over a long enough time period, =
even these events can be factored into a fixed central tendency.=C2=A0 =C2=
=A0Even if it's 100 years, etc.</div></div></div>
--000000000000b76d5405e3871328--
|
