What is the purpose of decentralized currency (the decentralized part anyway)? Relatedly, I do not understand the allure of cryptocurrency, to me is seems like a novelty; I’ve seen the cryptocurrency → anarchy link but that always seemed like nothing more than a plot device to me.
When the authorities want to go after bitcoin and shut it down like e-gold or the liberty dollars people, there is no central place where they can attack. They have to insert half the computation power of the entire bitcoin network to break it.
This kind of cryptomoney has a lot of the desirable properties of gold: anonymity, difficulty of counterfeiting, restricted inflation rate, high value density.
Sure, people like you might view the “difficulty of abusing those who store their wealth in money (rather than jump on the latest government-endorsed bubble) by inflating away their savings arbitrarily” as a bad thing, but others disagree.
What do you think about the problem of NGDP targets being trivially achievable with no economic effect? Does that suggest to you that the concept of NGDP may not carve reality at its joints?
1) Of course those are useful things, but lack of them doesn’t seem like a serious issue currently, do I underrate such problems?
2) Fair enough.
2b) I would prefer it if you used more neutral language to describe our disagreements. Here’s a good reason for you to do this: neutral language makes me less likely to get defensive and thus makes it psychologically easier for me to agree with you.
3) The NGDP thing: obviously I do not view NGDP as fundamental, which is why I usually talk about ‘monetary disequilibrium’ instead. I do think that NGDP targeting is better than currently used targets, and I haven’t been able to think of significantly better rules for the money supply (including ‘known increase in the quantity of money’, like bitcoin).
What is the purpose of decentralized currency (the decentralized part anyway)? Relatedly, I do not understand the allure of cryptocurrency, to me is seems like a novelty; I’ve seen the cryptocurrency → anarchy link but that always seemed like nothing more than a plot device to me.
When the authorities want to go after bitcoin and shut it down like e-gold or the liberty dollars people, there is no central place where they can attack. They have to insert half the computation power of the entire bitcoin network to break it.
This kind of cryptomoney has a lot of the desirable properties of gold: anonymity, difficulty of counterfeiting, restricted inflation rate, high value density.
Sure, people like you might view the “difficulty of abusing those who store their wealth in money (rather than jump on the latest government-endorsed bubble) by inflating away their savings arbitrarily” as a bad thing, but others disagree.
What do you think about the problem of NGDP targets being trivially achievable with no economic effect? Does that suggest to you that the concept of NGDP may not carve reality at its joints?
1) Of course those are useful things, but lack of them doesn’t seem like a serious issue currently, do I underrate such problems?
2) Fair enough. 2b) I would prefer it if you used more neutral language to describe our disagreements. Here’s a good reason for you to do this: neutral language makes me less likely to get defensive and thus makes it psychologically easier for me to agree with you.
3) The NGDP thing: obviously I do not view NGDP as fundamental, which is why I usually talk about ‘monetary disequilibrium’ instead. I do think that NGDP targeting is better than currently used targets, and I haven’t been able to think of significantly better rules for the money supply (including ‘known increase in the quantity of money’, like bitcoin).