Yes, it's just more complex math, search range proofs. You can prove inputs and outputs add up to zero.
The point was no one is adding up anything in bitcoin. You are not doing any math and verifying for yourself, youre trusting and having that node do the work just like in monero.
I think you're underestimating how massive the earth is and how much gold it still has. If anything, our technological capabilities mean our absolute rate of mining gold increased over time unlike bitcoin. And we are STILL mining after thousands of years. Bitcoin's existence also depends on miners mining so it is even more important. Gold can still exist without people mining it.
But even if I concede that point for the sake of argument, there is a 'virtually' limitless supply outside of earth that we will keep mining practically forever.
note1nsmxna8rg84kcmzffdup0hj73j4z0vptsdth4l26rq35qgcymyysv7r47z
For all practical purposes, gold is not supply capped (even ignoring extra terrestrial supply of gold). There is always more gold to be found or deeper to mine. It is just a matter of exploration, tech advances, and economic viability.
If bitcoin had a much much longer issuance schedule as a minute fraction of it's total supply, it would have a similar effect to gold.
Imagine if gold mining ended about a 100 years after it first started. That is bitcoin right now. But we are still mining gold after thousands of years.
About supply cap...bitcoin 21million is a lie. In reality you are not including yearly lost coins. So really, it is a constantly shrinking supply.
One might think "That doesnt sound bad, my bitcoin will keep growing in value!"
True enough, but if it is continually growing in value it rationally leads to an eternal hodl mentality which is terrible for price discovery.
Gold is is naturally not supply capped. It has a small amount of inflation similar to Monero.
If bitcoin wants to stay a public blockchain at the base layer, it literally can't be private without sacrificing something to achieve that on layer 2 (custodianship [fedimints], decentralization [lightning], or both).
So it's not just a matter of importing the tech over. I would happily move over if that was the case.
Monero has real utility that bitcoin does not.
There are instant transactions on Monero. They are called 0 conf. Merchants can account for doube spends and price them in. Online order transaction confs don't matter as you're waiting anyway.
But regardless, a layer 2 is already being explored and discussed.
https://www.getmonero.org/resources/roadmap/ (scroll to bottom)
I'm not sure it really matters that it is "external". Because at any moment anyone can choose to look thru the ordinal "lens" or point of view and track an inscription tied to the actual bitcoin protocol. It leaks into real world consequences.
1 sat can be sold for 100,000,000 sats. I don't see how this is not blatantly non-fungible.
This is how I understand it at least. Lmk if I am wrong and why. Haven't done a deep enough dive.
Would they trade 1 "clean" bitcoin for my 1 "tainted" history bitcoin? Probably not.
Still don't understand why sound money is impossible with fully private UTXO set yet.
No, I do mean fungibility. mutual substitution. interchangeable. 1 BTC =/= 1 BTC many examples.
Why so?
Without fungibility (in the real world, not just at the protocol level) you can't have sound money, period.
Privacy is a prerequisite to that fungibility.
If it is needless, why would you care about making a sidechain with it?
When it comes to privacy and fungibility Monero is king. Truest in spirit to the cypherpunk vision and p2p electronic cash titled in the white paper 👑
Currently, Bitcoin is eating crayons playing with literal NFTs, and recommending custodial centralizing layer 2s
It's like these people have never even skimmed thru the white paper. Wild. https://imgur.com/a/NYFHQRb