Author: Erik Aronesty 2022-07-14 16:01:39
Published on: 2022-07-14T16:01:39+00:00
There are various discussions going on among bitcoin-dev members regarding the coin emission curve and how to maximize the network value. One suggestion is to burn all fees and keep a block reward that will smooth out while keeping the ~21M coins limit. This would incentivize miners to collect higher fees transactions and distribute revenues equally over time to all participants, reducing the immediate supply of bitcoin and cooling down the economy. Another suggestion is to have long-term holders invest in mining to secure the value of their stake instead of relying solely on fees and miner rewards for security purposes. While some argue that this approach may only benefit rich holders, it's also noted that many people mine bitcoin, making it more decentralized than alternatives. Furthermore, there are concerns about the potential for rich holders to create a cartel and manipulate the market, but burning coins or locking them in an endless circulation loop could serve as a counter-attack against malicious soft-forks. The emission curve is also discussed, with some arguing that Bitcoin's success requires a 100-year curve to be entrenched globally, while others emphasize the importance of the emission shape for proper distribution. Bitcoin's expected (soft) emission time is compared to other coins, with one coin having an order of magnitude larger expected time than Bitcoin. Ultimately, the discussions revolve around finding ways to maximize the network value while staying true to bitcoin values such as immutable supply enforced by the game theory of hard money.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T22:49:27.684939+00:00