It's definitely not *obvious* that final supply is independent of starting amount, but it makes sense on reflection. If you have a continuous source and sink (imagine a container of water with a inflow and outflow), the end state (level of water) will obviously not depend on the starting amount of water.
For the rest, sure, agreed.
Oh yeah, i believe i followed intuition as well as math there, just hadn't thought it through before.
Another even more theoretical concern, correct me if I'm wrong, is that utxo set goes to infinity with emissions. No matter how good your storage (assuming atomic encoding is the limit , i guess) number gets unwieldy in a squillion years.
Hmm, id guess long term utxo set size doesn't depend on whether emissions continue, but mostly just on number of users and their usage patterns.
I guess you're right in 1 specific scenario, which is already interesting: imagine nobody uses bitcoin at all and we just mine empty blocks. Then it's clearly true.
Good point, hadn't considered finite population of users. Darn, i really liked having this (admittedly theory-only) leg up on the emission people
One small nitpick with the analogy, not to be annoying, is that the inflow is constant size while the outflow is proportional to total amount. More like a water balloon with a hole that stretches as you fill up more, and a constant hose filling it up
Ignore comment 🤦♂️
Didn't account for pressure on rate of outflow. Container analogy works i guess 😅
