Fierce debates have once again erupted in the world of cryptocurrencies, and this time, one of Bitcoin's fundamental pillars—the hard cap of 21 million coins—is in the crosshairs. The spark that ignited this fire is a proposal from one of the co-founders of Zcash and StarkWare, Eli Ben-Sasson, who stated that a fixed number of Bitcoins is unviable in the long term.
Ben-Sasson argues his position by stating that on an infinite time horizon, all coins will inevitably be lost—wallet keys are misplaced, users disappear, and assets "fall asleep" forever. Instead of a hard cap, he proposes introducing a fixed maximum annual inflation rate of 4%. In his view, this is a reasonable upper limit that ensures there are "enough coins for everyone" without undermining the asset's scarcity.
Logic and Risks: Network Security Under Threat?
The key aspect of the proposal is the "security budget" problem. Ben-Sasson emphasizes that as the block reward approaches zero, the Bitcoin network will be forced to rely solely on transaction fees. In his opinion, this creates serious risks for the network's security in the long term. He does not deny the very idea of a cap, but questions its form: what should be limited is not the total supply, but the inflation rate.
Ben-Sasson also discusses alternatives, such as the Network Sustainability Mechanism from Shielded Labs, and notes that more radical options, like demurrage fees on inactive coins, are too revolutionary for the current paradigm.
Community Reaction: "Sacred Cows" Under Attack
The crypto community has met this idea with hostility. The main arguments from opponents boil down to the fact that the 21 million cap is not just a technical parameter, but a "social contract" and a "sacred cow" of Bitcoin. Changing this parameter, they argue, would create a dangerous precedent, similar to how the Romans debased their coins, ultimately leading to the creation of a completely different asset.
The most emotional critics urge not to touch the "only scarce and decentralized digital money" and to experiment with other cryptocurrencies instead. Ben-Sasson counters: stagnation and a lack of adaptation to long-term challenges could also lead to collapse. He poses a rhetorical question: can scarcity be preserved with a truly low but constant increase in supply?
Expert Opinion: This discussion is not just a theoretical debate. It reveals a fundamental tension between Bitcoin's immutability and its long-term sustainability. While Ben-Sasson's proposal seems unlikely to be implemented due to community consensus, the very fact of its emergence is a powerful signal of the need to think about the post-emission era of BTC. The "problem of 2140" can no longer be ignored.