In Bitcoin we use the term “supply“ as a reference to the number of coins minted. This colloquialism is commonly conflated with the economic concept of supply, and then injected into a supply/demand relation as if it had the same applicability. Economically supply refers to desire to sell, while demand refers to desire to buy.
e > On Jul 9, 2022, at 08:24, Eric Voskuil <e...@voskuil.org> wrote: > > To clarify, price inflation is not caused by market production. Attributing > the observed lack of inflation (eg fee %) to loss is an assumed relation. > > Even if the amount of loss was known (which it is not), there remains an > assumption in the correlation of non-lost coins to price. Demand determines > price, not the amount of something in existence, hence the folly of S2F > (1/monetary-inflation). > > e > >> On Jul 9, 2022, at 08:15, Peter Todd <p...@petertodd.org> wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 07:26:22AM -0700, Eric Voskuil wrote: >>>> Due to lost coins, a tail emission/fixed reward actually results in a >>>> stable money supply. Not an (monetarily) inflationary supply. >>> This observation is not a proof of lost coins, that is an assumption. >> To be clear, are you claiming that there is no proof that coins are lost? >> -- >> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
