Quote from: smooth on November 03, 2015, 02:00:12 AM

Quote from: opennux on November 03, 2015, 01:55:20 AM

Quote from: americanpegasus on November 03, 2015, 01:23:24 AM

For those involved in the Aeon debate about enabling actual inflation, smooth has proposed the easiest and most socially acceptable solution would be just to leave in the first year's inflation rate (~0.85%) after the initial issue.

This ensures we grow at a different pace than Monero (for better or worse), gives us unique identity, and solves the issue of having actual inflation without any possible fears of it being too high of a number. Also, since this amount of inflation was already in the cards to begin with (after forking from Monero) this doesn't really alter the social contract.

On a long enough time span, this would result in significantly more Aeon being created each year vs. Monero, but the total values will stay relatively comparative for many years before this happens.

As far as the idea for smart inflation, it sounds like a great idea (as did digital cash initially in the 80's and 90's) but sounds like it might need some new brilliant combination of mathematics plus some vetting on an experimental blockchain before it could be considered to be incorporated into one of the major cryptonotes.

I'm in much more agreement with Johnny Mnemonic here. I can see the usefulness in "smart inflation" though.

Just remember that you are applying existing (and arguably failed) economics to brand new technology.

Did increased inflation and/or lowered/negative interest rates help anything ever? Was there ever a cause correlation?

Exponential growth is a thing. Fixing the inflation rate at a % of total emission per year vs. 0.3 per block is significantly different.

I'm a little confused.

What did JM say that you agree with?

In your last sentence what are you suggesting?

I don't think you are confused. I think I am the one that is confused. Cheesy

I tend to agree with what he said here: (Note it's a quote from 2 replies of his). And I put in a disclaimer of "tend to".

Quote

It would be great to see a "smart inflation" of sorts, where the rate of debasement is determined somehow by the transaction volume. This way, the money supply grows in proportion with the network.

However, "moar inflation" does not automatically mean more spending. You need enough to disincentivize hodling vs the opportunity risk of investing in productivity. Beyond that there's little incentive to spend (until you get to hyperinflation territory).

In my last sentence I am saying there is a difference between a % inflation rate and a fixed block reward - where the former eventually will grow the money-supply at a rapid pace. There was no suggestion to be honest.

DrkLvr_ makes a sound suggestion with lowering the % each year/period. I assume you would calculate a per block percentage, so the "compounded interest" would not only be per year, but would be from each block reward.

And maybe the percentages are so low compared to the time-line we are looking at.