Author: Tamas Blummer 2019-07-07 09:18:04
Published on: 2019-07-07T09:18:04+00:00
The author of the email critiques Eric's cryproeconomic theories, stating that they correctly describe Bitcoin as money, but fail to account for reliable memory for other uses. The author argues that if the memory enabling money had more uses, even temporary use would have utility and value. However, Bitcoin does not have consensus rules to enable reliable alternate uses. Additionally, the finite supply of coins implies a finite memory capacity, making units temporarily un-fungible, which leads to competition for units of memory and a price paid to those enabling alternate use. Furthermore, giving up control temporarily has a positive price and return of control is certain, leading to riskless interest for those giving up temporary control. The author also suggests designing systems to sustain Bitcoin for as long as possible while avoiding burning for any unlimited number of uses. Finally, the author notes that Bitcoin is different from borrowed money, which is fungible with other money, as it just exists without being borrowed into existence.
Updated on: 2023-06-13T19:46:40.473890+00:00