Hanshan on Nostr: Great writeup man, thanks for doing that. That all makes perfect sense, internally ...

Great writeup man, thanks for doing that.
That all makes perfect sense, internally anyway.

one thing as far as the UTXO set goes, isn't this just sunken cost fallacy? who cares about a particular history of transactions if the protocol doesnt reflect your values?

and if you care about my views on the comparison vs Monero:

I understand people are uncertain and scared of cryptography and want complete transparency
and it's true ensuring the supply crytographically doesn't give you the same guarantees. but it isn't intellectually consistent to rely on crypto in some arenas, and then insist supply guarantees can't use it like it's some absolute no-go zone.
the attack surface is finite. even if Monero has an inflation bug and goes to zero, the next chain will patch it and move on until it is solid.
technology and *trust in technology* moves in only one direction (over a long enough timeline), and mistrust in cryptographically-ensured supply is just a symptom of being early in a new field.

and a hard cap on monetary units is just a design flaw that foists network security onto transactoors, encourages hodl-only and turns a money into digital real estate.
its objectively true you don't need a fixed cap to be hard money and absolutely ZERO economic theory has ever suggested its a good idea.

but as arkinox (npub1ark…h43w) says, this is why we have all the different options.

anyway, just freestyling. I appreciate the thoughtful response.