Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A8FC002D for ; 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 ; 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 ; 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 ; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:56:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id r9so6070114ljp.9 for ; 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: <20220711023247.GA21856@erisian.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20220711023247.GA21856@erisian.com.au> From: Erik Aronesty Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 08:56:04 -0400 Message-ID: To: Anthony Towns , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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

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.=C2=A0= =C2=A0

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.

But you are = correct about the other two things:

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.

= 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.
--000000000000b76d5405e3871328--