Peter Todd just dropped a nuke: $BTC should ditch the 21M cap.
"If BTC had tail emissions from day one, no one would care."
"Economically, it's similar to gold."
His argument: We're marching toward a fee-only security model that's never been tested at scale. Other chains still can't generate meaningful tx fees after years. Tail emissions would give miners a permanent reason to secure the chain.
This is NOT a casual take. Todd is a core dev who understands the game theory deeply. He's basically saying the 21M hardcap might be ideological purity over economic reality.
The question: Can $BTC security survive on fees alone when block subsidies end? Or are we walking into a catastrophic unknown?
Debate is heating up. This could get messy.
"If BTC had tail emissions from day one, no one would care."
"Economically, it's similar to gold."
His argument: We're marching toward a fee-only security model that's never been tested at scale. Other chains still can't generate meaningful tx fees after years. Tail emissions would give miners a permanent reason to secure the chain.
This is NOT a casual take. Todd is a core dev who understands the game theory deeply. He's basically saying the 21M hardcap might be ideological purity over economic reality.
The question: Can $BTC security survive on fees alone when block subsidies end? Or are we walking into a catastrophic unknown?
Debate is heating up. This could get messy.