Will the need to increase BTC's max supply arise in the future?

[elda34b]

The moment you increase the bitcoin supply, the bitcoin will dump so fast that you can't imagine. Why we see so high bitcoin price is that it's supply is limited and fixed. This makes it a valuable currency. Since more people will use bitcoin, its demand will keep increasing but the supply will always remain the same.

There is always a possibility of a fork, and then it's a matter of time to see which chain live and die. I also believe that the 21 million is somewhat a magic number that has been marketed through various channels (regardless we want it or not) as the bitcoin important value compared to fiat.

When the time come we'll see, I don't really think we need to predict so early.

[Wexnident]

Not really. IF the issue of supply was because there wasn't enough, Bitcoin could be split into satoshis and that could be used to transact, heck, that's what most transact it most of the time anyway afaik, since transactions with 1BTC or more are pretty rare (unless you're trading). The issue with miners fighting over profits should be remedied if the number of miners was gradually reduced. Mining farms are the ones that are profiting right now due to the sheer amount of miners each farm has but really, once the profits seen from there are reduced, miners would gradually reduce to a point where they would still get profit off of fees.

A 51% is possible, yes, and if it happens, you can honestly believe that Bitcoin would probably lose a lot of support. But I doubt people would vote to increase the supply to avoid the attack, simply because doing so goes against what Bitcoin is after all.

[sujon5]

Why do we need to increase the maximum supply? Bitcoin is very dividable, so 21M is enough.

[bitcampaign]

it seems like it would be better if the supply was not added, the rarer the better, no need to worry about losing miners, but if the value is high enough it will keep coming new miners for bitcoin, 21 million supply I think that's very sufficient

[livingfree]

Increasing the supply is like the helicopter money.

I don't think that there's a need for it to increase. It's bitcoin and its scarcity is one of its asset and the best thing that it had. We are far seeing that day that there will be debates of increasing the supply. The concern is more of the transaction speed and fees.

The moment you increase the bitcoin supply, the bitcoin will dump so fast that you can't imagine. Why we see so high bitcoin price is that it's supply is limited and fixed. This makes it a valuable currency. Since more people will use bitcoin, its demand will keep increasing but the supply will always remain the same.

Being scarce is why many look at bitcoin as a valuable asset.

Yes, if the time comes and its supply will be increased, many things can happen and we have no idea if those things we have said will actually be one of it.

But as of looking at it, there's really no need for its supply to be increased.

[Bitcoin_bullish]

Now, what if developers decide to increase that hard cap in supply?

I've read similar articles and I am certain that this subject will be up to a lengthy discussion at some point, but for now, we do not need to worry about this. It is actually consensus that will decide as developers alone do not rule Bitcoin. Communication between all entities that constitute the Bitcoin Community will decide. But as said it is a subject that probably won't be discussed for at least another three years and the next halving of miners rewards.

[20kevin20]

yeah, it just translates to the fact that smaller fraction of satoshis will be valuable in the future. no need to have additional supply. who knows in the future 1 satoshi will be worth $1? so whatever the supply right now is enough. the value of every fraction will just change thru time. if the fees received by the miners will just be few satoshis, that means at that time every satoshi counts and very valuable

This will happen way before a satoshi could touch $1. Even if it was worth a penny (and it's getting closer and closer to that point), it'd still be too much imo. Fungibility should be a thing even if BTC touches an insane price point, and one of the most interesting aspects about BTC is that you can precisely pay a very, very small fraction of a penny if you need to.

If $1 will be equal to a satoshi, at that point it'd just crash BTC's price as you'd have to pay more bucks for the fees than you'd send/receive - and nobody's interested in doing that. If price keeps increasing the same way it did after the past few halvings, by 2024-2028 this should already become an issue.

[Pffrt]

Even if it arises, I think due to the decentralization, it will never be supported by the majority of the persons. As a result, we will see another shit fork of bitcoin claiming to be the real bitcoin. I would oppose to such a proposal if I keep alive.

[Mpamaegbu]

If anyone wants to see Bitcoin plummet and never survives it, they should increase the total supply above the 21 million. I have no iota of doubt that it's the limited supply of the coin coupled with its pathfinder's status that has given it the value and patronage it currently enjoys despite all the delayed transactions and backlogs that characterized it. Nothing else, IMHO. If coins like LTC or ETH enjoys the same limited 21million supply as Bitcoin; they would've beaten Bitcoin to the number one spot long time ago. So, I think the devs won't for any reason want to adjust Bitcoin supply because they should know there will be grave consequences if they do.

[enhu]

The limited supply is what made it more valuable. It's very limited but  its also divisible up to 8 decimals which 0.00000001 BTC might still have a value one day. if the price can extremely explode up. I guess the transaction fees would have to adjust that we'd be able to send a satoshi. Miners do have an option to mine other coins too if they feel like its not worth mining anymore.

[Josefjix]

Its fixed supply makes it a unique coin, miners would charge higher transaction fees when it comes to that angle of 2100; it would be interesting to watch as when it is completely mined in the next halving. Increasing the supply means breaching the security more as it is one of the things your being anxious of and aggrieved with.

1. If they supply is increased it means there is no fixed supply of the coin which makes it more difficult for nodes and traceable in times of scam and fraud.

[Leviathan.007]

It will not. Actually the reason of why many people think the price is rising over the time if because of the limited maximum supply. Imagine there will only 21 million bitcoins and 21 million people how can have latest one bitcoin in all over the world. This greed to collect more bitcoin is the reason the demand and price rising. There will never needed to increase maximum supply because soon after bitcoin reaching higher prices people will only trade satoshis instead of the bitcoins.

[shoreno]

It will not. . .

actually its been debated before and there are those people that love to increase the supply of btc and there are those who dont  . its ok if you disagree on the movement but decision depends on the devs or the ones that create btc  .

Actually the reason of why many people think the price is rising over the time if because of the limited maximum supply.

its one of thier reason but there are other reasons too like btc is too trusted or too old so people invest on it .

There will never needed to increase maximum supply because soon after bitcoin reaching higher prices people will only trade satoshis instead of the bitcoins.

whats the connect ? if they want to increase theyl increase it . price is high now but it depends on the people capacity if theyl trade with satoshi only or with full bitcoin

[Shimmiry]

I am neutral. I am confused what should be the right thing to do. Both choices of increasing or not increasing the bitcoin's supply does have advantages and disadvantages.
I guess, that should be resolved when the max supply is reached.
I trust the final decision that will be made regarding this matter. It's for the betterness ofcourse.

[semobo]

Increasing the supply will not be a solution because it is not going to change the value of bitcoin since price of bitcoin is proportional to demand and supply so increasing the supply will result in the drop of value.Well more people using bitcoin means more transaction then more transaction fee for them so it will give enough profits based on the fiat value and it will be more than enough for their expenses.

[ohyeahhaha122]

at best, the supply should not change if we want to keep the value of bitcoin, and bitcoin can be counted towards a very small number, so no worry about whether the supply should be increased or not.

[kryptqnick]

For long, Bitcoin has been touted as the "store of value" of the crypto/Blockchain space with its limited supply of 21 million coins. Based on estimates, all Bitcoin will be mined by 2100. Now, what if developers decide to increase that hard cap in supply? If at that point in time, Bitcoin's prices stay just the way they are right now (less than $1m), it may become unprofitable for miners to continue supporting the Blockchain. With no block reward, they'll be living off fees. If prices are too low, earned fees won't be able to sustain miner's operations. By then, developers would need to raise the limit of 21 million coins to a higher value, re-introducing a block reward in order to attract miners into the Blockchain. Otherwise, the security of the Bitcoin blockchain will be at risk.

Do you think that the need to increase BTC's max supply will arise in the future? Or will Bitcoin be able to "live" just fine with a max supply of 21 million coins? Your input will be greatly appreciated.

If Bitcoin becomes widely adopted, what we'll need to ensure that there's enough BTC to cover people's needs. However, I don't think the problem should be solved with making a bigger supply. A more realistic and still viable solution would be to mainly deal with satoshis rather than Bitcoins and perhaps split satoshis into smaller bits. This, however, would only make sense if the scalability issue is solved, and transactions can cost 1 Satoshi or less. Otherwise, people would not be able to own these really small bits of BTC and use them. All this also depends on what kind of future we see for Bitcoin. It's difficult if it's the future of money, but all these concerns can be avoided if Bitcoin is to become the new gold or something like that.

[gentlemand]

A more realistic and still viable solution would be to mainly deal with satoshis rather than Bitcoins and perhaps split satoshis into smaller bits. This, however, would only make sense if the scalability issue is solved, and transactions can cost 1 Satoshi or less.

Lightning networks can do that. You can divide a satoshi by another 1000. The question is whether they'll solve all the other stuff like being simple, safe and appealing enough to become the de facto front end for Bitcoin. I certainly ain't convinced yet.

[figmentofmyass]

The question then is how much of a block reward is necessary to prevent a 51% attack, and will fees be enough? The answer to that question is unknown. We have seen 51% attacks against other coins, so we know how much is not enough. We just don't know how much is enough.

any POW coin that shares mining algorithms (eg SHA256) and has a weaker hash rate is vulnerable to a 51% attack. every SHA256 coin is extremely vulnerable to attack by bitcoin miners. this is one of the reasons why minority hard forks are not particularly viable---minority miners must live in constant fear of rollbacks by majority miners.

unfortunately, that doesn't tell us much about the hash rate required to keep bitcoin secure from 51% attacks.

Do you think that the need to increase BTC's max supply will arise in the future? Or will Bitcoin be able to "live" just fine with a max supply of 21 million coins? Your input will be greatly appreciated.

No. There is no benefit to increasing the limit.

what is your reaction to this assertion made by peter todd? https://twitter.com/peterktodd/status/697532042553065472

IMO Bitcoin should have had an explicit 1%/year or so security tax, implemented via inflation.

[Shasha80]

I think it's a bad idea to increase the Bitcoin max supply, because Bitcoin is trustworthy and different from other currencies
the reason is because the Bitcoin supply is limited to only 21 million coins. If Bitcoin increase the supply again, what's the
difference with fiat, which can be printed continuously.I am sure Satoshi Nakamoto never planned to increase the Bitcoin
max supply, because if it was done he needed to change the code. And it can make Bitcoin lose trust. In conclusion Bitcoin
will be fine with a max supply of 21 million coins.