summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/54/011d274f83e0433c62da4479c881c0882c8e79
blob: dffb9db6ced6a053ea24abb2f93a6ceffdbc76cf (plain)
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
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB02C000E
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  9 Jul 2021 23:18:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D83A423D1
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  9 Jul 2021 23:18:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id jm2-Jt5gfNOK
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  9 Jul 2021 23:18:27 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-pf1-x435.google.com (mail-pf1-x435.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::435])
 by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D044C423CA
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri,  9 Jul 2021 23:18:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pf1-x435.google.com with SMTP id o201so5076191pfd.1
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id
 :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index
 :content-language;
 bh=uWUlEK8QXejEXyYRLokv1M54SN+k1HXhkijn9sPV5Xs=;
 b=Lnm+B4uZb7fTzt/js6FPLL80ESkgYLu1cNyRJHuIZhHip4D3UVTXz8uxwp6XrAPXf6
 i1e7iaQF4RR5v3sPCpjPlGd6jffUNtK+3+zteM50UjidzbdfpSRx6yVHyhM8q01KBi2b
 1kgFgSe5EYhbFjizFPBzE2wkxxZf08pU8afx/eONzbf8tAOhjl5k4sMFhNCIWzF2auaz
 2KKF5L/MulGiiJm+oedaNYI3yAOZJqBwrRccMbGbugJh3MUIDUV8l6bINdpnTg+D+btW
 qb2sF6nQ3B+3aNkQ/eB3L/WtsueRo9IwcCTPbgPbegZOYir2GWFXZJZG/pja2Pk8ahBx
 muXA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date
 :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index
 :content-language;
 bh=uWUlEK8QXejEXyYRLokv1M54SN+k1HXhkijn9sPV5Xs=;
 b=askL5bFCVLvpiXLXE3UlaFi8oA+JjqK78CLsnvQnO8aTXCTA3KkCL9GANVtMHw39YG
 T6UYrcBs0ANUXNDc5Ouiqfu3bXgzHGTCpzggM/+82yy9uLzwc3qT3aHlaqMgsLVvaVp2
 ZFbE8Q711tFcgoP2gBR+PmXYUIkVqmJTvR75xnY85zk+3kmLDQqRv2Bs3a53D5L5vv+3
 dmNEyBi2zEBK7CwlvGTVT9SESCbPlgOKsval/PaxHKegcb1bQdnVVURoL+MmWM4Ssz1F
 d0ChmIX6XgDucXXdlKaaYhJchudCSLDnFgR1qsbvGTduT+D67uQAGVx/5XvyPtPqra0j
 e+Qw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531DxHjguO9riVFjJmNBZPAVTnIR6HjLkUBD5Ejdyo3SYuvwMSig
 PFzyMH5/TZd8XlSe0ZXmsh245Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxOtTyGOUlq1vtLQNd4LiPONV2JNu5Hjv68pGk7IG8orALhFOJ+lZvrlp75nH25OUfqUbMVow==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:d648:: with SMTP id d8mr34169733pgj.280.1625872707022; 
 Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ERICDESKTOP ([2601:600:9c00:1d0::cccf])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t13sm6665210pjq.14.2021.07.09.16.18.26
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:18:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Eric Voskuil" <eric@voskuil.org>
To: "'Billy Tetrud'" <billy.tetrud@gmail.com>
References: <CAGpPWDYgYjUp+PRirca-QrbJZxwtyAnaQmr1kLbuKHSs2K+OBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGpPWDYgYjUp+PRirca-QrbJZxwtyAnaQmr1kLbuKHSs2K+OBw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:18:26 -0700
Message-ID: <00e201d77518$b8ed8e00$2ac8aa00$@voskuil.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 boundary="Apple-Mail-B536C3F7-971B-429C-A0ED-DD5AD14AC7BA";
 charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQJUZ/TNyto1vPqYi1vmX7jHk2R5NgFwqRZM
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: 'Bitcoin Protocol Discussion' <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proof of reserves - recording
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: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 23:18:29 -0000

>> You can prove that in your own wallet. All other scenarios imply =
lending (which is what is implied by =E2=80=9Creserve=E2=80=9D) and =
lending cannot be 100% reserve.

>You're using terms in non-standard ways. Putting money into a bank is =
not considered "lending" to the bank.

What people consider is irrelevant, all that matters is what is correct. =
A bank account as you are referring to it is indistinguishable from a =
money market (investment) fund in all aspects but federal reserve =
membership and regulatory controls. Interest (and offset expenses) =
derives directly from their earnings on this *investment*. Describing it =
otherwise is either an error (leading to false conclusions) or a lie.

> You may make a case that you're lending to a bank, and that they =
legally owe you repayment of that money on demand limited by the terms =
you mentioned. But regardless of a case that can be made there, pretty =
much no one considers that "lending". Since you you like defining things =
legally, depositing money in a bank is legally not defined as lending to =
the bank.

Please don=E2=80=99t bother to try and use statue as if it was at all =
relevant regarding economic concepts.

> So no, all other scenarios do not imply lending. You can have your =
coins in custody with someone else, and that someone else can keep 100% =
reserves if they choose (or agreed to) and can prove it to you via the =
method I described or the methods others have linked to.=20

That=E2=80=99s what Rothbard calls a =E2=80=9Cwarehouse=E2=80=9D - in =
order to distinguish it from investment. I=E2=80=99ve already made this =
distinction. Easier to prove with your own wallet, as I said. You are =
conflating this with banking, which should be obvious.

>> They are time deposits, read your bank agreement.

> You are =
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/timedeposit.asp#:~:text=3DA%20time%2=
0deposit%20is%20an,pre%2Dset%20date%20of%20maturity.&text=3DTime%20deposi=
ts%20generally%20pay%20a,of%20investment%20is%20term%20deposit.. =
https://www.slsp.sk/en/personal/faq/what-is-the-difference-between-a-term=
-deposit-and-savings-account if you don't believe me. The only way you =
would be correct is if banks were committing fraud and calling something =
a "savings account" when it isn't in fact a savings account.

No, I am not wrong. It's not a question of believing you, it's a =
question of understanding the concepts. You will find this language in =
your deposit agreement (as required by statute):

"9. Our right to require advance notice of withdrawals
For all savings accounts and all personal interest-bearing checking =
accounts, we reserve the right to require seven days=E2=80=99 prior =
written notice of withdrawal."
https://www.chase.com/content/dam/chasecom/en/checking/documents/deposit_=
account_agreement.pdf

"When a man deposits goods at a warehouse, he is given a receipt and =
pays the owner of the warehouse a certain sum for the service of =
storage. He still retains ownership of the property; the owner of the =
warehouse is simply guarding it for him. When the warehouse receipt is =
presented, the owner is obligated to restore the good deposited. A =
warehouse specializing in money is known as a "bank.""
- Rothbard

As you can see, he is not talking about what you are talking about when =
it comes to colloquial use of the term "bank", he is clear to define =
what he means by "bank".

"Someone else's property is taken by the warehouse and used for its own =
money-making purposes. It is not borrowed, since no interest is paid for =
the use of the money."
- Rothbard

Any expectation of interest implies *borrowing*, in other words, a =
*loan* to the bank.

"Whether saved capital is channeled into investments via stocks or via =
loans is unimportant. The only difference is in the legal =
technicalities. Indeed, even the legal difference between the creditor =
and the owner is a negligible one."
- Rothbard

> You're using terms in non-standard ways. Putting money into a bank is =
not considered "lending" to the bank.

I think it's quite clear that Rothbard considers it lending. I'm not big =
on appeal to authority, but sometimes it helps open minds. Links here:

https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Full-Reserve-Fallacy=


>> money markets have had no reserve requirement and have a nearly =
spotless record of satisfying their obligations.

> Lol, money markets are so new that they've had no opportunity to show =
their true risk.

1971, 50 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_market_fund

> In the finance world, things work fine for a long time until they fail =
spectacularly, losing more than the gain they made in the first place. =
This is a regular occurence. Its the reason bitcoin was created.

regular occurrence...

"Buck breaking has rarely happened. Up to the 2008 financial crisis, =
only three money funds had broken the buck in the 37-year history of =
money funds... The first money market mutual fund to break the buck was =
First Multifund for Daily Income (FMDI) in 1978, liquidating and =
restating NAV at 94 cents per share"

An investment loss of 6%.

"The Community Bankers US Government Fund broke the buck in 1994, paying =
investors 96 cents per share."

An investment loss of 4%.

"This was only the second failure in the then 23-year history of money =
funds and there were no further failures for 14 years... No further =
failures occurred until September 2008, a month that saw tumultuous =
events for money funds."

It was a "tumultuous" month for nearly all investments. The feds of =
course doled out the pork, and the funds had to take it (as if their =
competition did and they didn't they would fail due to higher relative =
capital costs and thereby lower rates). In the past, absent pork, they =
had raised money where necessary to maintain their NAV (just as banks =
do, but they go to the taxpayer, and just as all business do from time =
to time).

These are remarkably stable in terms of NAV. And people seem to be =
satisfied with them:

"At the end of 2011, there were 632 money market funds in operation,[19] =
with total assets of nearly US$2.7 trillion.[19] Of this $2.7 trillion, =
retail money market funds had $940 billion in Assets Under Management =
(AUM). Institutional funds had $1.75 trillion under management.[19]"

The point being, that this is as close to free market bank-based =
investing as exists in the white market. In a money market fund, the NAV =
is reflected in the share price, so any losses are evenly distributed - =
no different than when all those HODLers take a hit when Elon farts, and =
the reserve they maintain has been very effective in maintaining their =
$1/share *target* despite paying *interest* on *investments*. They are =
merely shifting market returns into interest, just like banks. Market =
returns over short periods aren't always positive. No surprise. The =
larger point being, BANKS ARE INVESTMENT FUNDS.

>> Irrelevant.

> It is certainly not irrelevant. People have been lead to believe that =
they can withdraw their money from their accounts. People expect this.

Irrelevant, people have minds and free will and can read the contracts =
they are actually signing. Contracts are the *actual* Law associated =
with non-aggression.

> Banks are doing nothing to educate people on the limitations of that =
fact.

Again, irrelevant. And wholly unnecessary given compulsory taxpayer =
deposit insurance.

> PoR would give people the ability to see quite accurately how much =
reserves there are and can use this knowledge to put pressure on =
institutions to keep the reserves those people think they should keep.=20

For all of the reasons I've stated, it's a fairly pointless exercise, =
but people can do what they want. But if they are doing this with a =
deeply flawed understanding of banking to start with, they will be =
disappointed in the outcome.

>> Without 100% =E2=80=9Creserve=E2=80=9D there is no way to =
cryptographically demonstrate =E2=80=9Csolvency=E2=80=9D.=20

> You can show proof that you're 80% solvent, and then claim the other =
20% is in other assets. This is, again, still useful.=20

80% solvent ... 50% pregnant.

>>The schemes don=E2=80=99t preclude hacks, insider or otherwise, =
bankruptcy, or state seizure, no matter what the reserve

> You're right, but that's irrelevant.=20

I'll leave that to the reader. The alternative is to use your own =
wallet.

> But it seems like you're not interested in understanding what I'm =
saying or discussing these things honestly.

I'm not interested in allowing flawed concepts to be perpetuated without =
question. This is just a drain on capital that could be put to much =
better use. How many times have I heard the oxymoron "full reserve =
banking", and how much capital has been burned on this futile exercise, =
simply due to a failure to understand these concepts.

> So I'm going to end my conversation with you here.

While seemingly off-topic, these are things that need to be aired in =
this community. Thanks for the discourse.

e

On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 11:32 AM Eric Voskuil via bitcoin-dev =
<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Jul 9, 2021, at 10:44, Billy Tetrud <mailto:billy.tetrud@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> >  there is an unsupportable leap being made here
>=20
> You think that because you're misinterpreting me. I'm in no way =
claiming that any solvent company can prove it, I'm simply claiming that =
any company can prove that they have bitcoin reserves to cover bitcoins =
promised as account balances.=20

You can prove that in your own wallet. All other scenarios imply lending =
(which is what is implied by =E2=80=9Creserve=E2=80=9D) and lending =
cannot be 100% reserve.

> > Banks (lending institutions) do not operate under any such pretense
>=20
> You seem to be saying that banks are under no legal obligation to =
serve cash on demand to customers. While you might be right,

I am, as banks are lending institutions.

> again you're misinterpreting me. Banks do in fact make claims to their =
customers that they'll be able to get cash out of their account on =
demand.

Up to the insured limit, in 7 days. This is of course true because the =
taxpayer has insured the bank to that level.

> They're called demand deposit accounts for a reason.

They are time deposits, read your bank agreement. Not that it makes any =
difference. How the contract is satisfied is not a term of the contract, =
just that it is. And as I pointed out, money markets have had no reserve =
requirement and have a nearly spotless record of satisfying their =
obligations.

> And certainly customers expect to be able to withdraw their cash on =
demand.=20

Irrelevant.

> > With a 100% of investment cash hoard, there is zero lending and zero =
return
>=20
> I did say "pretend" did I not?

See above.

> > =E2=80=9Crelate to=E2=80=9D is a far cry from 100% =
=E2=80=9Creserve=E2=80=9D
>=20
> Indeed. Again, you seem to be misunderstanding me. You're putting the =
words "100% reserve" in my mouth, when I never said any such thing. =
Proof of 80%/50%/20% reserves is still useful if that's the clear =
expectation for the customer/client.

Without 100% =E2=80=9Creserve=E2=80=9D there is no way to =
cryptographically demonstrate =E2=80=9Csolvency=E2=80=9D. And even with =
that, investors would have to accept the promise that there are no other =
liabilities.

The schemes don=E2=80=99t preclude hacks, insider or otherwise, =
bankruptcy, or state seizure, no matter what the reserve.

It=E2=80=99s information, sure, but it=E2=80=99s not what people seem to =
think. If one wants full reserve banking, use a wallet. If one wants to =
invest, the money will be spent - that=E2=80=99s why it was raised. =
There can be no covenant placed on it that will ensure it=E2=80=99s =
return.

e
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev