The string of accounts and how many lengths away an account is will be a short term concern but not a long term concern.
Why? The one day decay of 10%/365 doesn’t do much. Transaction itself aren’t strongly taxed.
What’s taxed is letting money sit and those taxes go one level back in the chain.
Output(This will have 10 outputs) 0xA’ .02 0xn1....-n99 $14.98 0xMinerFee $.04
Transactions costs fees based on the amount of data they contain. If you batch up 10 transactions into 1 transactions the cost doesn’t become the costs of 1 transaction.
Only because the banking system is more expensive and because there is a significant amount of technology that allows the actual transfer of real value on BTC.
The banking system can internally move money for nearly zero fees. Stocks get traded in a way where a 0.1% transaction tax would have major repercussions.
Our banking system costs money because it does things like fraud protection. Anybody can charge back any credit card payments made with their card.
This whole discussion reminds me of how Eliezer interacts with people who put forward AGI designs. When the AGI designer is vague, it’s impossible to specifically show how the AGI will take over it’s own utility function. When it comes down to the math, and Eliezer shows them how the AGI will overtake it’s utility function the person just says: “Well that’s not exactly what I meant...” and they are never really convinced.
I’m not certain that what you propose can’t work but it seems you are making a lot of assumptions that things will just work out without having thought it through on a deeper level.
Any suggestions on how to think about it a deeper level? I’m new around here just trying to get my head around some of these ideas.
A couple points, if your one year decay rate is 12% and you have $1 billion in the system you will decay $120 million that will flow back to the system. Yes it will matter how close you are to the nodes of activity. That is the point. This updates our decision function when engaging in commerce. The question isn’t is this the most affordable apple, it is is this the best apple made by the best process in a way that will lead to the most value for future apples.
I still have othe options to entice the mining of my transactions. Potentially more attractive than fees.
I’d be more than happy to engage the existing banking system and with unlimited capital I wouldn’t involve Bitcoin. The cost from 0 to transaction 1 on btc is 1000x less than 0 to 1 on the banking system. State of Texas wants 20 million in reserve to even sniff your banking application.
Any suggestions on how to think about it a deeper level? I’m new around here just trying to get my head around some of these ideas.
I think writing down a monto carlo model helps to make decisions explicit. At best you do it in a form where the model is easy to modify for other people.
You could run a tournament where people can submit bots that act in the economy to maximize their returns.
I’d be more than happy to engage the existing banking system and with unlimited capital I wouldn’t involve Bitcoin.
Bitcoin invests a lot of resources into not needing to trust any single entity. That’s why it’s transactions are much more expensive than Ripple transactions.
If you want to trust central authority to uphold law anyway, then it’s likely beneficial to not go via bitcoin trust model and have cheaper transactions.
Why? The one day decay of 10%/365 doesn’t do much. Transaction itself aren’t strongly taxed. What’s taxed is letting money sit and those taxes go one level back in the chain.
Transactions costs fees based on the amount of data they contain. If you batch up 10 transactions into 1 transactions the cost doesn’t become the costs of 1 transaction.
The banking system can internally move money for nearly zero fees. Stocks get traded in a way where a 0.1% transaction tax would have major repercussions.
Our banking system costs money because it does things like fraud protection. Anybody can charge back any credit card payments made with their card.
This whole discussion reminds me of how Eliezer interacts with people who put forward AGI designs. When the AGI designer is vague, it’s impossible to specifically show how the AGI will take over it’s own utility function. When it comes down to the math, and Eliezer shows them how the AGI will overtake it’s utility function the person just says: “Well that’s not exactly what I meant...” and they are never really convinced.
I’m not certain that what you propose can’t work but it seems you are making a lot of assumptions that things will just work out without having thought it through on a deeper level.
Any suggestions on how to think about it a deeper level? I’m new around here just trying to get my head around some of these ideas.
A couple points, if your one year decay rate is 12% and you have $1 billion in the system you will decay $120 million that will flow back to the system. Yes it will matter how close you are to the nodes of activity. That is the point. This updates our decision function when engaging in commerce. The question isn’t is this the most affordable apple, it is is this the best apple made by the best process in a way that will lead to the most value for future apples.
I still have othe options to entice the mining of my transactions. Potentially more attractive than fees.
I’d be more than happy to engage the existing banking system and with unlimited capital I wouldn’t involve Bitcoin. The cost from 0 to transaction 1 on btc is 1000x less than 0 to 1 on the banking system. State of Texas wants 20 million in reserve to even sniff your banking application.
I think writing down a monto carlo model helps to make decisions explicit. At best you do it in a form where the model is easy to modify for other people.
You could run a tournament where people can submit bots that act in the economy to maximize their returns.
Bitcoin invests a lot of resources into not needing to trust any single entity. That’s why it’s transactions are much more expensive than Ripple transactions.
If you want to trust central authority to uphold law anyway, then it’s likely beneficial to not go via bitcoin trust model and have cheaper transactions.
I took your advice and posted this over in discussion:
http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/m38/publishing_my_initial_model_for_hypercapitalism/