A well-known crypto fund founder recently put forward a rather shocking view: Bitcoin may face a collapse risk within the next 7 to 11 years.

What is this judgment based on? The core logic is quite straightforward—if Bitcoin cannot sustain its network security budget through sufficient transaction fees, it will never become "too big to fail." It sounds a bit harsh, but the data is clear: the proportion of miner revenue relative to Bitcoin's market cap has been declining from 8% in 2015 and is expected to fall below 1% by 2025. This is not minor fluctuation; it’s systemic decline.

Halving events year after year reduce miner rewards directly squeezing the security budget. Once Bitcoin’s security drops below a certain critical point, a 51% attack becomes profitable—and the cost could be less than $3 million per day. At that point, the network’s defensive capability really comes into question.

So where is the problem? He traced it back to the classic block size debate. He believes that the governance structure of Bitcoin Core development has led to a stalemate in on-chain scaling, with throughput artificially limited to 7 TPS, which is completely unrealistic for large-scale adoption. Imagine global users waiting in line for block confirmations, with wait times possibly reaching 32 years—this obviously cannot support real commercial applications.

Since there is a problem, there must be a solution. The founder proposed two approaches: one is to break through the 21 million total supply cap, and the other is to allow the network to accommodate double-spending or censorship risks under certain circumstances. But both solutions are also quite radical and touch on Bitcoin’s original principles.

Interestingly, he does not lose confidence in the crypto industry. On the contrary, he believes this field has far surpassed its initial conception, demonstrating potential far beyond expectations. Perhaps this is the most worth pondering—problems and hope often coexist.