related posts
122 sats \ 0 replies \ @monk_cactus 17 Feb 2023
I'm having trouble seeing how "the yard sale model" has any relationship to reality.
Everyone knows that well managed capital will accumulate, and that's good news for anyone who isn't living pay check-to-pay check. Perhaps the model is helpful to illustrate the mechanics of this, but aside from that I'm not seeing a use for it.
reply
12 sats \ 1 reply \ @Eximpius 17 Feb 2023
It still just made everyone poor, and a few with a little more with their answer to the problem with taxes lmao. Instead of having a few super rich, it literally just made everyone poor instead lmao
reply
374 sats \ 0 replies \ @nout OP 17 Feb 2023
Exactly - I think that was not the intention of the article, but it sort of creates a good argument against the current model overall and it makes Bitcoin look better :)
reply
4 sats \ 0 replies \ @selfish_gene 17 Feb 2023
появятся рынки не продажи а покупки! теперь продавец ищет покупателя... поверь им... так будет лучше... тот кто покупает что то знает для чего ему тратить ресурс планеты... звучит дико но это реальность брат мой. оставь тут объявление что хочешь купить теслу к примеру за 2000 сатоши и продавец тебя найдёт... так это будет работать.
reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 17 Feb 2023
https://theyownbitcoin.bitcoinreserve.com/
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 30 Nov 2023
This is evocative. I'm trying to figure out what it means in a transaction setting, vs a gambling setting. E.g., implications for wealth accumulation that accrues from trade, etc.
Here's a backlink to a referring discussion.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DiracDelta 18 Feb 2023
The non-retarded version of this is that a slight edge via interest rate arbitrage (Cantillon effect) will dominate the wealth accumulation effect of being "smart", while the wealth accumulation to those who only have the "smart" bit will be negligible if it is without the Cantillon effect.
Most bitcoiners will not admit this. Still in denial around ratio. Will be many decades until they are humbled.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b 17 Feb 2023
I'd like to see an alternative model, where people who lose risk what the people who won risk. ie if you distribute risk tolerance evenly, regardless of current capital, what happens?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @nout OP 18 Feb 2023
One side effect will be that random set of people will run out of money in that case. If 0 wouldn't be issue, then I'd expect normal distribution around the starting point? (I'm not 100% sure I understood your question though, also I'm not that smart...)
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 18 Feb 2023
The absolute risk (X dollars) for the coin flip in these games is decided by the poor person (20% of their "wealth").
If the poor person could tolerate the absolute risk of the rich person, I wonder if the outcome changes.
I think you understood me. Some people would probably run out of money sooner, but I have a feeling the distribution would be a little more even.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @selfish_gene 17 Feb 2023
все и так будет равномерно... для этого нужно время. сатоши заложил 141 год... посмотрим что из этого выйдет...
reply