Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

b10c.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 65 posts

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#41

Post by arcticbull »

HighlandSpring wrote: post #28
arcticbull wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but there's a big difference between dropping 38 basis points and losing 57% of its purchasing power. [edit] more importantly, the yen may have dropped 38 basis points against the dollar, however that doesn't necessarily represent a drop in domestic purchasing power at all. Just foreign purchasing power. This change makes imports into Japan more expensive and exports of Japanese products denominated in dollars…

Doesn't get more apples and oranges than comparing fiat currencies with hard money

Well that just sounds like a religious argument, no? Is there some basis on which you are making this assertion?

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#42

Post by jtms »

arcticbull wrote: post #5
chejazi wrote: post #4

Ah, a soft fork focused on SegWit transactions. Every time I try and follow along with the latest in Bitcoin I just don't get that excited. I think that's part of the point, though. "Hard money" and all.

Hard money doesn't exhibit 15000% annualized inflation in a one-month period. That Weimar Republic behavior. Don't get me wrong, I'm not mad about that - it's made me tons of money on the short side. I'm just saying, it's bad money.

Bitcoin is deflationary by definition, not inflationary. Once the last coin is mined that's it - that's all there will ever be. I think you might have inflation and deflation backwards. Inflation can result from a large supply of currency being injected into a monetary system (ie: "bailouts"). This injection dilutes the value of all existing units of currency. This can cause prices to rise (though not always). In other words: the value of the good or service is relatively static, but the value of the money decreases due to the supply being larger. What happened in the Weimar Republic (hyperinflation) has nothing to do with Bitcoin price swings... they turned the money printers on max and diluted themselves into oblivion trying to prop up the economic machinery. This is quite the opposite of what is happening in BTC land. BTC price swings are just speculation (aka gambling with extra steps).

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#43

Post by arcticbull »

jtms wrote: post #42
arcticbull wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard money doesn't exhibit 15000% annualized inflation in a one-month period. That Weimar Republic behavior. Don't get me wrong, I'm not mad about that - it's made me tons of money on the short side. I'm just saying, it's bad money.

Bitcoin is deflationary by definition, not inflationary. Once the last coin is mined that's it - that's all there will ever be. I think you might have inflation and deflation backwards. Inflation can result from a large supply of currency being injected into a monetary system (ie: "bailouts"). This injection dilutes the value of all existing units of currency. This can cause prices to rise (though not always). In oth…

You're describing money supply, not inflation. Inflation is a change in purchasing power of a unit of currency, not the supply of the currency. The supply may influence its purchasing power but there's a lot more to it, obviously.

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#44

Post by rogueSkib »

arcticbull wrote: post #34
rogueSkib wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your thought experiment is assuming that $1T is permanently locked "in a vault", therefore it is not actually part of the monetary supply, since it can't be spent without violating your assumption.

Not quite, it's not permanently locked, I have just decided not to spend it. Ditto money people squirrel away in mattresses or vaults. It is an analogy for a change in behavior of market participants over time which must by necessity be included in any complete model of an economic and monetary system. Broadly speaking, "velocity." This system remains at equilibrium because supply went up, and velocity went down lead…

I think what you're ignoring here is that as any individual gains access to more liquid wealth, they become increasingly more likely to spend some of it.

As your access to supply increases, your demand for more monetary units decreases. As your demand for monetary units falls below your demand for other goods and services you want in life, you spend some of it.

This is how markets function, right? This is why bubbles pop for example, eventually holders of an asset reach a price where they want to take some off the table.

"Everyone has a price."

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#45

Post by hanniabu »

jtms wrote: post #42
arcticbull wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard money doesn't exhibit 15000% annualized inflation in a one-month period. That Weimar Republic behavior. Don't get me wrong, I'm not mad about that - it's made me tons of money on the short side. I'm just saying, it's bad money.

Bitcoin is deflationary by definition, not inflationary. Once the last coin is mined that's it - that's all there will ever be. I think you might have inflation and deflation backwards. Inflation can result from a large supply of currency being injected into a monetary system (ie: "bailouts"). This injection dilutes the value of all existing units of currency. This can cause prices to rise (though not always). In oth…

Decreasing emission is not deflation, it's still inflation but just less of it

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#46

Post by hanniabu »

arcticbull wrote: post #43
jtms wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin is deflationary by definition, not inflationary. Once the last coin is mined that's it - that's all there will ever be. I think you might have inflation and deflation backwards. Inflation can result from a large supply of currency being injected into a monetary system (ie: "bailouts"). This injection dilutes the value of all existing units of currency. This can cause prices to rise (though not always). In oth…

You're describing money supply, not inflation. Inflation is a change in purchasing power of a unit of currency, not the supply of the currency. The supply may influence its purchasing power but there's a lot more to it, obviously.

Words have different meaning in different contexts. In blockchain, inflation refers to the emission of newly minted coin.

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#47

Post by dcolkitt »

arcticbull wrote: post #39
dcolkitt wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peak-to-trough, the Pound Sterling lost about 25% of its value against the Deutsche Mark during Black Wednesday. It lost about 30% over Brexit. The Aussie dollar fell about 35% against USD during the 2008 financial crisis. The Euro fell approximately 40% against the Swiss franc over the 2011 sovereign debt crisis. So yes, "real currencies" can and do fluctuate significantly in terms of exchange rates. It simply makes…

To be clear, inflation isn't exchange rates. That's a change in how much you can buy in a foreign country with your currency - and how much of your goods they can buy with a unit of their currency, not how much you can buy at home. Bitcoin's purchasing power fell equivalently the world over and so inflation is a more useful benchmark to compare the loss in purchasing power than foreign exchange is.

In most of those cases, you'd see similar declines if you benchmarked against a trade-weighted basket of G10 currencies.

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#48

Post by arcticbull »

hanniabu wrote: post #46
arcticbull wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're describing money supply, not inflation. Inflation is a change in purchasing power of a unit of currency, not the supply of the currency. The supply may influence its purchasing power but there's a lot more to it, obviously.

Words have different meaning in different contexts. In blockchain, inflation refers to the emission of newly minted coin.

In economics inflation is a change in purchasing power of a currency. Words have meaning. This is what inflation means to everyone without laser eyes ;) and the word appears to have been redefined to spur unsubstantiated fear to pump bitcoin. So I suggest we all begin using the right word for the job and correcting folks who are using it wrong.

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#49

Post by hanniabu »

vmception wrote: post #13
ASTP001 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like what? Curious to hear about some interesting manual interactions you can do with the network that isn't exposed in typical wallets.

This Pay-to-Taproot output spendable by anyone is a decent example. Most multisignature behaviors still aren't exposed, its kind of weird. But looking for to taproot making multisignature addresses indistinguishable from other addresses. There's the general empty space that people shove all sorts of things into. From plain text metadata to encoded messages to derivatives trades.

From my experience that see it as a technical superiority thing. Where if you want to use that functionality you'd be smart enough to know how to use the cli and if you can't then you probably shouldn't be using it. And then are typically met with hostile attitudes saying that if you're that much of a noob and need a GUI then just go use a lite client or something. The white bitcoin core community is very ostracizing and unwelcoming.

Even vitalik has mentioned that this attitude was one of the things that turned him away from bitcoin (along with refusal to evolve features) and launch ethereum.

Re: On anyone-can-spend Pay-to-Taproot outputs before activation

#50

Post by nullc »

lawn wrote: post #29
stickac wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real artistry is to deploy updates without doing a hard fork. Taproot is one of these and it is very, very important.

The real artistry is convincing people that the complexity cost of soft forks are worth it.

Complexity costs come from backwards compatibility. Backwards compatibility is essential because otherwise the change potentially confiscates users funds.

Assuming compatibility is required softforks generally reduce complexity because they relax the requirement for synchronization between participants.

Post reply on HN