I’ve read it before, but I took even more time to re-evaluate that document. So far here are my conclusions.
Linear growth is linear growth. Bitcoin had linear growth for the first 4 years of its existence at 50 BTC every 10 minutes, or 5 every minute. Grin has a rate of 60 per minute (supposedly forever). It doesn’t matter if that was 6 per minute, or 1 per minute, as it’s the same linear growth in supply. What should be noticed is that a rate of 5 per minute vs 60 per minute is a 1:12 ratio. If Grin had the exact same inflation as Bitcoin’s 4 year linear inflation rate and experienced the same market cap values over time, then the only difference would be a 12x in price per coin*. If we multiply current GRIN prices (roughly $1) by 12 and compare to BTC historical price, we’ll see that BTC didn’t reach $12 price point until 2 1/2 years into its life. Based on this evaluation, we can assume Grin to be over bought**. My only question is why is it overbought?
I see also the reasoning behind the high inflation to ward off technocrats and whales which have a negative impact on the initial distribution of wealth. So, it makes sense that the monetary policy would discourage buying and holding in order to defend against this. However, doesn’t this also discourages all buying early on? The incentives behind the network early on are not to purchase or hold grin, but rather to mine grin as this is where most of the value is being distributed towards. To make my point brief, I see that miners will be the technocrats created from this network as they’re the ones benefiting the most.
On a broader perspective, Bitcoin also suffers the same outcome. Miners in the Bitcoin network are the “house” in this case, and ultimately, the ones who win the game. It would seem like in order to make the game fair, we’d need to level the playing field for miner participation. It’s obvious that this is the goal with the cuckoo cycle based proof of work, however it’s questionable whether this is the perfect solution; we shall see. It’s undoubtedly a hard problem.
If miners are the only network participants truly benefiting, then why participate at all as a speculator or developer?
*It would have been nice it Grin’s linear inflation was more similar to that of Bitcoin’s earlier linear inflation at least arithmetically. This way the comparison in prices of Grin against early Bitcoin prices would be more obvious for the first 4 years. A supply growth of 5 grin per minute would have achieved this.
**Overbought is only speculating that market growth of Grin should follow similar market growth of Bitcoin. However, this is overlooking many market conditions that may factor into this speculation; number of exchanges trading Grin, amount of overall crypto market capitalizations, general cryptocurrency awareness, etc.