Ethereum

FAQ: Ethereum issuance reduction

When it comes to reducing issuance, there are many important questions to consider. Having studied these questions extensively, I thought it would be fruitful to address them one by one with detailed answers.

Link 👇

FAQ: Ethereum issuance reduction

When it comes to reducing issuance, there are many important questions to consider. Having studied these questions extensively, I thought it would be fruitful to address them one by one with detailed answers.

Link 👇

https://ethresear.ch/t/faq-ethereum-issuance-reduction/19675

Developing transparent finance for @ethereum

Maybe just do nothing. 

This FAQ thing makes a lot of assumptions that I do not think are true or real. 

Nobody's "welfare" is improved by reducing issuance. Nobody will "safe" on hardware only because issuance is reduced. 

I think you want to fix something that is not broken.

Nobody wants this.

This is the alt account of Sister Hazel. Writings at https://powerlaw.systems. Building https://testnet.uvio.network. 

The welfare gain applies at the protocol level, and emerges since users under equilibrium are compelled to assume lower costs. Hardware is merely one of these costs; there are many more such as illiquidity, trust in third parties and other factors increasing the risk premium, various opportunity costs, taxes, etc.

The point is that it will not help if they try to use the best options. If you pay so much that more people than necessary do a job, say hire four security guards for a bar instead of one, then this means that people will do unnecessary work. This is undesirable.

Hardware has no cost on the protocol level. People have costs. They participate in a binary choice. They do, they don't. If they do they are always trying to use the best option which includes hardware costs.

All of this are second order consequences. Maybe let the issuance alone and work on first order consequences.