Regarding the explanation you gave on youtube, I think you did a decent job. However, the hardest part for many to wrap their head around is what the linear supply actually means. You explained this to some point by explaining hat Grin is deflationary, but in addition it means:
That price will only fall until increase in adoption will outpace the relative supply. For example, we are now at 15 % inflation [Source], meaning that with only 15% yearly growth in users you would already expect the price to level out.
In reality there will not be an infinite amount of grin. Supply will approach the loss rate (coins lost because of people losing the keys forever). Meaning that for example assuming a yearly 2% loss rate, the total supply of grin would level when Grin reaches its 50 years birthday.
In any case, thanks for introducing Grin to your audience.
So you mean that price will fall onloy for as long as the level of adoption remains low. Once adoption picks up, and more users begin accumulating GRIN, the price will increase. Correct?
Yes, on average you would expect the price to level out when adoption catches up. Ofcourse there will still be fluctuations due to other factors such as sentiment, seasonality (bull-bear cycle) and market manipulation.
How do you know it went to the Canadian government?
I am always surprised that confiscating assets like this is lawful. At best I would expect regulators to be able to force KYC on costumers. Otherwise confiscating assets is simply theft masking as lawfulness.
I donât know anything definitively about TO, just as I donât know anything definitelvey about John McAfee, Jeffrey Epstein, or Charlie Kirk (for all I know their deaths were staged and they are living it up on an island), I was just sharing this article:
No need to mine or invest, the U.S. gov became a top 10 bitcoin holder by amassing a cost-neutral crypto reserve. Perhaps other districts will use the same strategy to build up their reserves. Reminds me of the gold ban of 1933 that was implemented across the realm in a similar fashion.
This is actually a make or break test moment for authorities, not for grin users. There are two possibilities:
Scenario 1
Regulators are simply regulating/enforcing KYC and AML - that is within the prerogative. KYC is not a problem for most of us but I pity those of us who are in authoritarian counties who might not have the luxury of being able to reveal their identities and trust their authorities.
Scenario 2
If regulators are overreaching and simply trying to steal the funds, they prove themselves to be evil âWho Watches the Watchmensâ - they would validate and fuel the narrative that privacy projects are needed to fight corrupt regulators and governments.
I hope it is scenario 1, but the world is going a bit mad lately with fascism being normalized and common sense being criminalized. Time will tell.
When it comes to the scenarios, no one wins here, except the authorities. The loose is always on the consumer side and KYC/AML changes nothing in that regard.
I do remember FTX and the recent Coinbase leaks. Thanks to the regulators for being here and enforcing KYC/AML to protect basic consumer rights.
Nonlogs or P2P. There have been 1 million sat days on GRIN-BTC on nonlogs lately and I would bet within a year itâs averaging 5-10x that amount as word spreads and they list more pairs.
For anyone who is in the process of recovering their TO funds through the Palladium legal case, Iâll be interviewing Palladium this weekend. They informed me that there is an update in the case. The vid will be available shortly after the interview. Hope to have it done Saturday morning, my time.
