BTC
Debate has raged over whether Bitcoin remains true to its cryptocurrency principles, with critics claiming its ability to decentralize and combat control is fading. Meanwhile, Peter Todd, one of the currency’s developers, is proposing “tail resurgence” as an alternative.
The cypherpunk movement’s core focus is on cryptography and privacy tools to protect individual rights and promote a decentralized society. It combines the word “cypher” as in cryptography, and “punk” as a symbol for the rebellious, do-it-yourself spirit.
This movement has played a significant role in shaping the internet, especially key technologies like blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The creation of Bitcoin also brings the cypherpunk movement closer to its goal of building technology for digital privacy, security, and independence.
Recently, it questioned the fixed supply limit of 21 million Bitcoin. It included a disclaimer: “There is no guarantee that the maximum supply of Bitcoin will not change.”
Michael Saylor, CEO of Micro Strategy and a top Bitcoin holder, also retweeted the video.
This is not a modified screenshot.
Michael Saylor, the unmistakable face and most influential person in Bitcoin today, posted a video from BlackRock with a really interesting disclaimer:
“There is no guarantee that the 21 million bitcoin supply cap will not change.”
They are… pic.twitter.com/Xg3sQP9BJw
— Joel Valenzuela (@TheDesertLynx) December 18, 2024
Doubts have been raised about whether Bitcoin’s fixed supply remains as secure as it was once believed after BlackRock issued a disclaimer. Serious questions have been raised about the cryptocurrency’s ability to sustain its spirit for long due to the growing capitalist influence of corporate players.
Another critic on X, @sebp888, criticized prominent Bitcoin developers, including Adam Back and Peter Todd, for remaining silent on these issues. He said the Bitcoin community must resist the growing dominance of corporations.
Peter Todd retweeted the tweet with a screenshot showing a community note below Sebastian’s post. The note referred to Todd’s 2022 article: “Surprisingly, background emissions are not inflationary.”
In this article, Todd considers the threats to Bitcoin when it abandons block rewards in favor of transaction fees to incentivize miners. Every Bitcoin mined
He warned that such a shift could be unstable. “So far, no proof-of-work currency has ever operated based on transaction fees alone, and academic analysis has found that in this case, block creation is unstable.”
He proposed an alternative like Monero's backhaul implementation, where miners get a small, fixed reward per block forever.
Lost Bitcoin naturally balances out the coins being emitted.
According to Todd, this model does not cause inflation but rather creates a stable supply. He also said that the lost coins naturally balance out the coins that are constantly being emitted. Thus, in the long run, coins are created just as quickly as they are lost.
He demonstrated this through matic modeling in which he demonstrated that constant rewards with natural currency loss lead to a stable monetary system.
One user on X, @LibreHans, questioned Peter Todd’s predictions. He said: “Do you think you can predict the future? How can anyone take you seriously?” Todd responded somewhat sarcastically that the loss of coins could only be stopped “magically” in the future.
However, his article also points out how difficult it would be to implement such changes to Bitcoin. Todd noted that a hard fork to enable it would likely mean not getting consensus from the large and diverse Bitcoin community.
“While Monero has managed to gain a broad enough community consensus to implement emissions, it is unclear at best whether this can be achieved against the larger Bitcoin,” he wrote.