What if hard limit on bitcoin had been 21 Billion instead of 21 Million?

[pksingh]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 8 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 5 instead of 8 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 8 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

[1715499735]

1715499735

[1715499735]

1715499735

[1715499735]

1715499735

[farwellbit]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 18 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 15 instead of 18 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 18 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

Look at your question and easy to answer, if the BTC had 21 billion units for sure it would not have the market value that it has today, far from that being optimistic it would be worth only a few exchanges. This is the law of the market, if you have too much product and the price is low, as the product is scarce and the price is high.

And no, I can not see this as a problem, so much so that to be able to mine 1 coin just today and a last line equipment is necessary 24 hours a day for this, and the more it gets shorter the bigger its going to be its mining difficulty, thus joining all these factors the number of 21 million and reasonable to good in amounts of currencies.

[Nhebu]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 18 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 15 instead of 18 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 18 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

If we have 21 billion of bitcoins? Bitcoin will not come up with this price. The more it has supply the more the quantity is low. Even there is a great number of demand, if the bitcoin has lots of supply it will never be increased. As a matter of fact, bitcoin can divided up to 8 decimal places. Meaning to say, it needs to be multiply exponentially before the price will move up.

[Hydrogen]

The question is the same as asking what would happen if an asteroid composed 100% of gold, weighing 100 times the total weight of all the gold on earth, crashed into the planet (without causing a natural disaster or being burned up in atmospheric re entry) and affected current gold prices.

Litecoin having a max supply of 84 million coins may be a decent example of higher supply translating to lower overall price in comparison to alts like dash being nearer to a 20 million supply with higher value per coin. Fundamentally it may be safe to say that higher supply translates to reduced value and the opposite is also true.

There could be other implications. If bitcoin's supply was 21 billion that could make it easier for holders to be more decentralized. On the flipside it could simply mean that 1,000 people would still own 40% of the coins (if the recent bloomberg story is true) and that everyone would simply own large numbers of coins with ownership remaining proportional.

[faithupgrade]

It would lead to low priced bitcoin. Dont expect we are 15000usd today.

[HasHe]

One of the main reasons for bitcoin to get such a high value and demand is that its total supply is limited to only 21 million coins.Out of it,already 16.5 million coins are available in circulation and only 4.5 million coins to be mined more.That's why,people trust it that its value would grow more as demand would be more and no more supply in the future.But if there is 21 billion coins available,then the huge demand would make no difference in bitcoin price and also,demand would get reduced as people know that 21 billion coins would be available.So,bitcoin's demand as well as price would get reduced too much.

[amrulshare]

Have you ever read about inflation? it is a situation where an item more difficult to find food will be more expensive the price of the item. like Bitcoin, if Max supply has reached 21 billion then it will be more expensive Bitcoin. You should think Right Now,  to make the decision to save some of your Assets in bitcoin for your own future

[alexsandria]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 18 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 15 instead of 18 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 18 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

Ofcourse it is good and for many people it is a very positive but what if you didn't or we didn't control the rising of the value, yes we are so very excited and happy. But at the same time we also cannot control if it dumps. Yes, if the hard limit of bitcoin is about 12 bilion it is good yet it is risky for many people.

[Lancusters]

I don't understand such issues. Why his hands to kill bitcoin? This will provoke inflation. Additionally, you cannot change the rules during the game. It was announced initially that the number of coins will be only 21 million. People invest in bitcoin because they know that this asset is limited and the demand for coins will continue to grow.

[Hell-raiser]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 18 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 15 instead of 18 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 18 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem

Honestly, I don't quite understand your question.

As far as I know, Bitcoin currently has 8 decimal or fractional places, not 18. Even so, there can be a few issues if we just chose to increase the amount of coins to 21 billions. If my memory serves me right, the total number of bitcoins to be mined wasn't taken out of the blue. It has something to do with technical limitations of modern processors. Besides that, so many bitcoins would likely scare away quite a lot of people, so in your hypothetical situation the price for 1000 bitcoins might in fact be lower than it is now for 1 bitcoin if that is your question.

[ss890]

There could have been two cases in such regard. One is the price couldn't have reached so much heights as there is lots of supply for the bitcoin and people are not enough in the market. I think the prices would have been around $ 1000 USD at that scenario. Because we are speaking about the supply which is almost 10x more than the current supply and thus the price would have been 10x lower Thant he current rates.

Now if according to your assumption if the fractional places for the circulating supply would have been 18 billion then yeah surely the price would have been 100 times more than the current one because to reach that much prices we will need trillion dollar business to be flowing throughout the world. God dam it thats too much money to be put on the online market. But yeah could have been possible.

[shaun98]

Obviously, the price wouldn't be the same as today. In fact, it would be much lower. If one coin was 15k, and there were 21 billion in circulation, the total marketcap would be $315 trillion which is way over the top.

[akram143]

If bitcoin limit will be 21 billion then the price of bitcoin will be very very less because the price of bitcoin is based on the supply and demand so if there are more bitcoins the supply will be high and the demand will be low.So the price will be less than current situation.

[Lucius]

Some people think Satoshi Nakamoto is made some things wrong and that he should determine higher total amount of BTC,make block size bigger then 1 MB and maybe invent Lightning Network so we not have any problems today.But everything is made for good reason and if you search Satoshi posts on this forum : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3 (yes,this is Satoshi Nakamoto profile) some things become a bit clearer.

I think 21 million BTC total supply is optimal number,it could be a million less or million more,but 21 billion is too much and I doubt the price will be even 10% of today value.Some may say that bigger number of total BTC will help to fairer distribution,but BTC is here from 2009. so all have chance to join to this train,and even today is no to late.3+ million BTC is still waiting to be mined,and price is today very low from what we may expect in next 5-10 years.

[arpon11]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 8 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 5 instead of 8 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 8 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?





---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

Yes, Number is a big problem and I have been studying currently why some coins with large number do find to increase in price and those with lower number do increased faster in price and one thing that I have find out is that those coin increase in price because of there number. The price cannot be the same if bitcoin supply in circulation is up to $21,000,000,000.

[louisedem]

Have you ever read about inflation? it is a situation where an item more difficult to find food will be more expensive the price of the item. like Bitcoin, if Max supply has reached 21 billion then it will be more expensive Bitcoin. You should think Right Now,  to make the decision to save some of your Assets in bitcoin for your own future

Thats essential, but this topic has made me top for a while, Bitcoin information has been spread through massive number of people, and now a news or articles about the limitation of Bitcoin will be shockingly come to life, given rhe fact that a very huge number of people has been working here already and we cannot say that some how, people were eaening here so much how a bout the others? I am expecting that due to massive demand , the supply for Bitcoin is continuously happening.

[Yatsan]

Hello Peeps,

Here is a game theory question to question the rush and rash in bitcoin world.

The number of bitcoins is limited to 21 millions with 8 zeros in fractions. What if the fractional places would have been 5 instead of 8 and total coins in circulation would have been 21 billion coins with same generation span, do you believe that price would be same as now? By same generation span, I mean that generation per block would be 1000 times more than the actual so that the world get 21 billion bitcoins in same span as actual.

What if the fractional places would be still 8 with 21 billion coins in circulation in same generation span? Would the price be still the same as now?

Is number a problem?
Hypothetically, To correct the market behavior of mad rush towards sustainability, shall we create a new taxonomy say "TheCoin" which is 1000th of Bitcoin and convert  all exchanges and conversations in new taxonomy?

I think number is a problem.

What do you think?

Well obviously, the larger the market cap, the lower the demand amd its market value. It has to do with the law of supply and demand. Anything from the market which is having a limited supply will have a high demand which will alsp result for its value to be much expensive especially if the limit is already reached, it will make the demand soar.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I hold bitcoins. And working on new coins. I hate ICOs. I think privacy is overrated. I believe privacy is necessary but not always.

[Hell-raiser]

Some people think Satoshi Nakamoto is made some things wrong and that he should determine higher total amount of BTC,make block size bigger then 1 MB and maybe invent Lightning Network so we not have any problems today.But everything is made for good reason and if you search Satoshi posts on this forum : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3 (yes,this is Satoshi Nakamoto profile) some things become a bit clearer.

I think 21 million BTC total supply is optimal number,it could be a million less or million more,but 21 billion is too much and I doubt the price will be even 10% of today value.Some may say that bigger number of total BTC will help to fairer distribution,but BTC is here from 2009. so all have chance to join to this train,and even today is no to late.3+ million BTC is still waiting to be mined,and price is today very low from what we may expect in next 5-10 years.

I remember I read somewhere that initially the block size was equal to staggering 32 megabytes and it was later reduced by Nakamoto himself to avoid the centralization of mining. Though I don't really know what the block size has to do with Bitcoin centralization. I also heard that 21 million coins and 8 decimal places were chosen on purely utilitarian basis due to some hardware or processor limitations, though I don't know which either. But the total number of coins certainly wasn't based on some economic theory or idea.

[BrewMaster]

price would have been a lot higher than what it is right now. it would probably be at something near $100,000 and we would have been discussing about how strong the $100k resistance is instead of the $20k.

and the reason for that is pretty simple, one of the biggest things that have prevented people from investing in bitcoin and seeing it as "too expensive" has been the fact that for example right now 1BTC or 100,000,000 satoshi is worth $16500. if there were 5 decimal places and we shifted the zeros to whole bitcoin then 1BTC would have been 100,000 satoshi and many of the mental barriers would have been lifted.

one of the reasons i suggested to move to satoshi: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1926157.0

at the end of the day, at code level nobody cares if 100,000,000 satoshi is called 1 bitcoin or 100,000 satoshi. the max is never going to be bigger than 2,100,000,000,000,000 satoshi

[sofi@]

If the hard limit of bitcoin would have been 21 billion instead of 21 million pricing of bitcoin will be affected whereas it could possibly lowered the value of bitcoin since the supply will become so much available. As the law on demand and supply will be followed it may have negative impact with the current pricing of bitcoin but it will be good for mining business and in later years