Hahahaha no. Other way around. I assume you meant "consumers" as a short hand for "normal people" and not its actual meaning of "people who need to buy things on a regular basis" because you do not want to be a consumer in a deflationary market. You're constantly having to piddle your wealth away because you're forced to exchange money for goods and services. Like food and shelter.

Deflation means no access to modern lending because there's no incentive to do anything with money except hold it. That's fine if you're already wealthy, because either you have it on hand, have assets for collateral, or can call in a favor. If you're not wealthy, you're just fucked.

Having easy access to debt is, overall, a phenomenal thing for the non-wealthy. Can you abuse it? Yup. Can it be predatory? Sure. Does it mean the average person gets access to capital without access to generational wealth or decades of saving? Absolutely. The middle class kind of doesn't exist without it. See also: The Ability to File For Bankruptcy is Good, Actually.

> And if you spend like 5 minutes pondering the justification for why that is, you'll see it's mostly BS.

I'm always a fan of examining things, but there's a prerequisite. You need enough education, critical thinking skills, and maturity to understand why you start at the null hypothesis: any "Secret Knowledge They Don't Want You To Know" theory is conspiracy bullshit.

And enough cynicism to know when people start talking about "elites and politicians" like they're one homogenous lump of evil agenda, it's usually a shibboleth for other, ah, less socially acceptable beliefs.

This is, like, one of the few things economists -- even most of the crazy ones -- agree on.

Gahhh. Stop taking your economics advice from bitcoin bros and goldbug weirdos. They don't know how anything works and don't want to learn. It's like taking legal advice from sovereign citizens. It's not even that difficult to understand why it's a terrible idea!

High inflation is bad, sure. Deflation is an economic nuke. You know those people who spent like a whole bitcoin buying pizza way back when? "If I'd just held onto it, I'd have $HUGE_NUMBER now".

Yeah. If your money goes up in value, you have a huge incentive to stockpile it and not buy pizza. It's not just Dominos that loses out. All of the people and suppliers that go into pizza do, too. You need people to spend and lend to have liquidity and money flow.

> we find more gold every day, so there is an easing already happening naturally

That's not how that works. You're tying your entire country's economic growth to the production output of a single mining industry. Gold is not distributed evenly across the globe, either.

And yeah, we did all that in the past, and it caused deflation, which caused numerous financial panics [0], broke the British economy [1] and after two world wars, the US ended up with like 70% of the world's gold [2].

[0] https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/banking-panics-...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_1914

[2] https://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/center/mm/eng/mm_dr_01.h...

--

TL;DR: Tying your entire country's economic growth to the production output of a single mining industry is stupid and we don't do it for very good reasons. Everything is a conspiracy if you don't know how anything works.

Mailto links are not that common these days.

Usually the very best you can do IRL is "probably fine" or "maybe not fine" and that's just not good enough to justify blocking customers. Email is an old tech and there's a lot of variation in the wild.

And before anyone gets upset about that, every engineering discipline has these kind of risk tradeoffs. You can't build a bridge that'll last 5,000 years and costs half of our GDP, even though that's "safer". You build a bridge that balances usage, the environment, and good stewardship of taxpayer money.

Rewriting the world to protect against a specific kind of threat is insane.

You still have multiple programming languages preinstalled on your OS, no matter which one it is.

You just invented a worse Stack Overflow.

Using libraries is good, actually.

Gamedev is its own weird thing, and isn't a model you want to generalize to other industries. It has to optimize for things a lot of software does not, and that skews development.

Vendoring libraries is almost always a terrible idea because it immediately starts to bitrot and become a footgun.

Sometimes it's necessary, but it's not desirable, and you almost always just want to pin your dependencies instead.

> formal verification

Outside of limited specific circumstances, formal verification gives you nothing that tests don't give you, and it makes development slow and iteration a chore. People know about it, and it's not used for lot of reasons.

You don't do this in any non-trivial system.