The term “ultrasound money” has been thrown around quite a bit in the Ethereum (ETH) community, often describing the network’s potential to become a deflationary asset with better tokenomics than Bitcoin (BTC). While some proponents believe this narrative is well-founded, others argue it is overstated and based on overly optimistic assumptions.
Is The Ethereum “Ultrasound Money” Narrative Exaggerated?
In a post on X, antiprosynthesis.eth, a developer, challenged the “ultrasound money” narrative, arguing that it is often accompanied by jargon that may conceal the reality of Ethereum’s monetary policy. Specifically, the analyst believes the narrative is a bit “overboard” and loaded with “a bunch of pseudo-scientific hocus pocus” that might mislead ordinary users.
Adopting a neutral view, antiprosynthesis.eth, Ethereum’s monetary policy is, most importantly, designed to be sustainable without the dangerous pitfalls of hyperinflation or excessive deflation. The developer argues that striking a balance in token emissions is critical.
In Ethereum’s case, this is achieved by burning a portion of gas fees. Following the activation of EIP-1559 in 2021, the first smart contracts platform changed its bidding system, creating a system where the network sets a base fee with the allowance for a user to “tip” the validator. The base fee is burnt, helping the network become deflationary–or, as researchers argue, sustainable.
Go to Source to See Full Article
Author: Dalmas Ngetich