A heated discussion has erupted in the crypto community, sparked by StarkWare co-founder and CEO Eli Ben-Sasson. He publicly questioned one of Bitcoin's cornerstones — the hard supply cap of 21 million coins. According to Ben-Sasson, this model lacks practical sense in the long term.
The expert's main argument is the inevitable loss of private keys. Over time, owners lose access to their wallets, leading to the irreversible removal of coins from circulation. According to estimates published by Ledger in November, the volume of permanently lost bitcoins has already reached 4 million. Ben-Sasson argues that over an infinite time horizon, this process will lead to the loss of all keys, and therefore all coins. As an alternative, he proposes abandoning the absolute cap in favor of a predetermined annual emission rate — at 4%. In his logic, such an inflation rate roughly corresponds to the growth rate of the Earth's population and would allow the asset to maintain circulation.
Bitcoin Community: "This Destroys the Very Idea"
The reaction from supporters of the first cryptocurrency was predictably harsh. Opponents immediately pointed out that the fixed supply of 21 million BTC is not just a technical detail, but a fundamental principle underpinning the concept of "digital gold." One user stated that this is a "terrible idea," and any protocol change in this direction would open Pandora's box for further, even more dangerous modifications. Others noted that abandoning the hard cap would make Bitcoin indistinguishable from thousands of other inflationary cryptocurrencies, stripping it of its main advantage — scarcity.
In response to the criticism, Ben-Sasson countered that the asset would retain its scarcity if inflation rates remained constant and predictable. He also dismissed the argument that 21 million coins is too few, reminding that Bitcoin is divisible into 2.1 quadrillion satoshis. However, in his view, even this number will shrink over time due to the same key losses.
Compromise from Zcash: Burn to Mine
Amid the debate, Zcash founder Bryce "Zooko" Wilcox proposed a more elegant solution — the Network Sustainability Mechanism (NSM). This model, discussed within the Zcash ecosystem, preserves the hard cap of 21 million ZEC. The idea is that users can voluntarily burn their coins, and an equivalent amount of emissions will be gradually returned to circulation through miner rewards over four years. Thus, the total supply does not increase, but the network gains incentives to maintain security without the risk of uncontrolled inflation.
Analyst's Opinion: Ben-Sasson's idea is undoubtedly provocative, but it raises a real issue regarding Bitcoin's economic sustainability after the last satoshi is mined. The current model relies entirely on fees, which in a world of declining transaction activity could become fatal for network security. However, any change to Bitcoin's monetary policy is playing with fire. The community rightly fears that even the slightest deviation from the "21 million" principle would destroy the trust built up over years. The compromise option from Zcash appears much more thoughtful and safer, as it does not violate the key tenet but merely introduces a mechanism for voluntary redistribution.