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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1VqIXI-00073H-Fk
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:19:20 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.49 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.49; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
helo=mail-bk0-f49.google.com;
Received: from mail-bk0-f49.google.com ([209.85.214.49])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1VqIXH-0001mA-DN
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:19:20 +0000
Received: by mail-bk0-f49.google.com with SMTP id my13so1781186bkb.36
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:19:13 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.205.9.131 with SMTP id ow3mr62111bkb.152.1386663552897; Tue,
10 Dec 2013 00:19:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.204.69.197 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:19:12 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <B09A5DE3EF411243BB3328232CD25A5DABFF021E7A@MAILR023.mail.lan>
References: <CAO7N=i1p=7fGgzJXvctRoGTsztP6f9rqs78s9=Vnc3TC0RVLdA@mail.gmail.com>
<20131209221130.GA22556@shavo.dd-wrt>
<CAO7N=i0Y=sKXa=djc+8652e_0NiWLyMA9hrXyddaS+gOTu0yxQ@mail.gmail.com>
<B09A5DE3EF411243BB3328232CD25A5DABFF021E7A@MAILR023.mail.lan>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 09:19:12 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJDJA7_HOiJ-_jazXERSYfWvO-DHk89ih4pG8dEK5K9Z9A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Mike Caldwell <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf302238077e85ce04ed29c4fd
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(laanwj[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information. [URIs: swipeclock.com]
X-Headers-End: 1VqIXH-0001mA-DN
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Monetary Authority for Bitcoin
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:19:20 -0000
--20cf302238077e85ce04ed29c4fd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Mike Caldwell <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com>wr=
ote:
>
> I believe that if there ever becomes a consensus that Bitcoin=E2=80=99s i=
nflation
> parameters were a show-stopper for the Bitcoin economy, that the power to
> correct it lies with merchants, who would vote for changing the rules. I
> believe they would do this not by changing Bitcoin, but by accepting, in
> parallel, a brand new alt coin that reflects the consensus as to how the
> inflation should be. I believe such an alt coin would have its genesis a=
t
> around the time that consensus moved toward accepting inflation, rather
> than adopting the seignorage of some other alt coin out there today.
>
Agreed Mike.
The economic parameters of Bitcoin are fixed in stone forever. Adding a
monetary authority to Bitcoin is impossible and undesirable because the
implicit contract of Bitcoin is that there would finally be a currency in
which no one could mess around with. It would betray all prior holders.
But these are ideas everyone is free to experiment with in new altcoins. If
the lack of inflation in Bitcoin ever becomes a problem in day-to-day
usage, such a parallel chain could become the de-facto cryptocurrency for
spending. Or just maybe fiat already works well enough there...
Wladimir
--20cf302238077e85ce04ed29c4fd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Mike Caldwell <span dir=
=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:mcaldwell@swipeclock.com" target=3D"_blank">=
mcaldwell@swipeclock.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra=
"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div lang=3D"EN-US" link=3D"blue" vlink=3D"purple"><p clas=
s=3D"MsoNormal">
<br></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt;font-family:Ca=
libri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I believe that if there ever becomes=
a consensus that Bitcoin=E2=80=99s inflation parameters were a show-stoppe=
r for the Bitcoin economy, that the power to correct it lies with merchants=
, who would vote for changing the rules.=C2=A0 I believe they would do this=
not by changing Bitcoin, but by accepting, in parallel, a brand new alt co=
in that reflects the consensus as to how the inflation should be.=C2=A0 I b=
elieve such an alt coin would have its genesis at around the time that cons=
ensus moved toward accepting inflation, rather than adopting the seignorage=
of some other alt coin out there today.</span></p>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Agreed Mike.</div><div><br></div><di=
v>The economic parameters of Bitcoin are fixed in stone forever.=C2=A0Addin=
g a monetary authority to Bitcoin is impossible and undesirable because the=
implicit contract of Bitcoin is that there would finally be a currency in =
which no one could mess around with. It would betray all prior holders.</di=
v>
<div><br></div><div>But these are ideas everyone is free to experiment with=
in new altcoins. If the lack of inflation in Bitcoin ever becomes a proble=
m in day-to-day usage, such a parallel chain could become the de-facto cryp=
tocurrency for spending. Or just maybe fiat already works well enough there=
...<br>
</div><div><br></div><div>Wladimir</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
--20cf302238077e85ce04ed29c4fd--
|
