From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE214CA5 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:41:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pf1-f179.google.com (mail-pf1-f179.google.com [209.85.210.179]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4010E782 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:41:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f179.google.com with SMTP id x15so5383375pfq.0 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2019 10:41:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=xNdfHx1gv9LQcRupxV6rMR6rP1P+jKm2JCs14zopwWo=; b=C8uZs7fmWdBVl1gMNRkoG4E2nFLeTDKyqmX/tZXTnSU2200hYaVF07C79a6vG7Kq0j ceY+S1e7T2eCW5RlJhWQuStfaD4X4+m/B2HgurSi2a4fsSI3ib3YnLnuh+OHyIR49UR5 21fho22ZUVmLgscXvxU6Q1Mr3hI8QLXj+o5c2Dw0QDXoJPKlo3J4BVj9s2DMqJv7+rLQ mUau9Jqw9npNeB3sFOaHtMGaM0eTIgKgvjuYlUtqTCiyaBZGP4A9pHnbBLCvP0kHPyWT +cMXG/UVH8qfHHFm/JQ88ps1aonS/WPo+FwawpZ9BzDZcj0mRHxX6WGqr4bch00q0aPk 4eXg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=xNdfHx1gv9LQcRupxV6rMR6rP1P+jKm2JCs14zopwWo=; b=YuTBdujHEmiEw4bRUmljy7cnoZUeoi1L8Il47Tx/OU4nlfsXvvledpViewOA21yUtC iVWFwYuvteKVDpI+14/S7Ir3PFEMFw9M6lTt24Hei8e9OvlsdrrYBwRtiJLIq+v/J9bs 7IzTlHd2hJsNKcHAEnX0FQbuwYMirgzlOf+7maaMa/Ux1fih9OJN7U5duixuh84JNT+g rKSZNaG5a42YhZwUOOgwtVneP40fCpCYuBrNScsJWuzyJy3ZdY9Wz68bKfZWT9vemt51 7unvynkWVuGtx2hOFJiEBahOd1BnFNQK1nYhPXXOZJ6bzmysa048L2aGF1HDL7BHVoCZ 0l7w== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVIiWzvSyq7YjmLgwx+n/4oAF/2FKSp8tDjivO3onZ2FW7jcM+S Cg2TPY1zF5XcX9C/lC1Sd46T+ZM7Gg8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz6rq6eO4TMYyiA+/LkPt5bUoKqrySGEXOYas7FIC9j4boci4UoutMR2kDQN/V6SzSmyaiAGg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:db4b:: with SMTP id x11mr19957296pgi.254.1561916494537; Sun, 30 Jun 2019 10:41:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:a080:16bb:29ff:b615:305b:5e87? ([2601:600:a080:16bb:29ff:b615:305b:5e87]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u23sm8749710pfn.140.2019.06.30.10.41.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 30 Jun 2019 10:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Eric Voskuil X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16F203) In-Reply-To: <1A808C88-63FD-4F45-8C95-2B8B4D99EDF5@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2019 10:41:33 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <83705370-79FC-4006-BA04-4782AD5BE70B@voskuil.org> References: <0DBC0DEA-C999-4AEE-B2E1-D5337ECD9405@gmail.com> <7A10C0F5-E206-43C1-853F-64AE04F57711@voskuil.org> <708D14A9-D25E-4DD2-8B6E-39A1194A7A00@voskuil.org> <1A808C88-63FD-4F45-8C95-2B8B4D99EDF5@gmail.com> To: Tamas Blummer X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:52:13 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Generalized covenants with taproot enable riskless or risky lending, prevent credit inflation through fractional reserve X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2019 17:41:36 -0000 > On Jun 30, 2019, at 03:56, Tamas Blummer wrote: >=20 > Hi Eric, >=20 >> On Jun 29, 2019, at 23:21, Eric Voskuil wrote: >>=20 >> What loan? Alice has paid Bob for something of no possible utility to her= , or anyone else. >>=20 >=20 > Coins encumbered with the described covenant represent temporary control o= f a scarce resource. >=20 > Can this obtain value? That depends on the availability of final control a= nd ability to deal with temporary control. For something to become property (and therefore have marketable value) requi= res that it be both scarce and useful. Bitcoin is useful only to the extent t= hat it can be traded for something else that is useful. Above you are only d= ealing with scarcity, ignoring utility. > An example where final control is not available are areas and jurisdiction= s where land can not be bought only long time rents are offered. > People pay high prices there to step in place of the renter in an existing= long term rent contract and they figured out the contracts that work under t= hese restrictions. I was careful to point out that bitcoin is not in any way consumable. Occupy= ing scarce land is a service to people. Units of bitcoin encumbered such tha= t they cannot be traded for something of service to a person do not constitu= te property. You cannot even polish them, stack them on the floor, and roll a= round on them. > Bitcoin=E2=80=99s predominant use is already store of value. Many assume n= ot only wealth preservation but that it would allow to purchase of more good= s in the future than now. Yet it has been established that these encumbered coins cannot purchase anyt= hing of value except to the extent that an imperfect market is unaware of th= e scam. > This leads to unwillingnes to give up final control, which can resolve in t= wo ways: >=20 > - Increasing fiat prices for final control. We see this, and is actually f= urther reinforcing unwillingnes to give up final control. > - dealing with temporary control. We do not yet have the technical means o= f even representing this. Developing them is my goal. Your goal is clear and not at issue. > I think you do not show the neccesary respect of the market. I=E2=80=99m not sure what is meant here by respect, or how much of it is nec= essary. I am merely explaining the market. > Your rant reminds me of renowed economists who still argue final control B= itcoin can not have value, you do the same proclaiming that temporary contro= l of Bitcoin can not have value. It seems to me you have reversed the meaning of temporary and final. Bitcoin= is useful because of the presumption that there is no finality of control. O= ne presumes an ability to trade control of it for something else. This is te= mporary control. Final control would be the case in which, at some point, it= can no longer be traded, making it worthless at that point. If this is know= n to be the case it implies that it it worthless at all prior points as well= . These are distinct scenarios. The fact that temporary (in my usage) control i= mplies the possibility of value does not imply that finality of control does= as well. The fact that (renowned or otherwise) people have made errors does= not imply that I am making an error. These are both non-sequiturs. > I say, that temporary control does not have value until means dealing with= it are offered, and that is I work on. Thereafter might obtain value if fin= al control is deemed too expensive or not attainable, we shall see. The analogy to rental of a consumable good does not apply to the case of a n= on-consumable good. If it cannot be traded and cannot be consumed it cannot o= btain marketable value. To this point it matters not whether it exists. Best, Eric > Tamas Blummer >=20 >=20