[warent]

I skimmed their white paper[1] and saw this beauty:

> In order to reduce uncertainty regarding the monetary mass, addresses showing no activity for over a year (as determined by timestamps) are destroyed along with the coins they contain

It is, however, followed by this footnote:

> (inactive addresses will no longer lose their funds after one year as initially proposed in the white paper, they will only lose their staking rights until they become active again. What it means is that if an address is inactive, it will not be selected to create blocks (which would slow down the consensus algorithm), and it will not be allowed to vote until it is reactivated (to avoid uncertainty about participation rate).

1. https://www.tezos.com/static/papers/white_paper.pdf

Edit: Added footnote

[SilasX]

Yes, it's easy to penalize hoarded money. The hard part is penalizing substantively hoarded money. If I just make sham exchanges back and forth between some ring of addresses that I own, then we're right back to square one.

Does it do anything to distinguish sham transactions from real ones? Or have any theory about the difference? If not, then it's not doing anything novel.

(I know you're not the advocate of this, just a general reply to technical solutions to low money velocity.)