I buy your conclusion, but don't love your argument. Your argument is not exactly wrong, but it is mostly based on semantics of whether we can call the future crypto "bitcoin" or not. You say, maybe the future will be inflationary, but if it is, then you don't want to use the word "bitcoin". Ok fine. But the more interesting question: is most future cryto dollars going to be in an inflationary currency?

I think no. Here is why:

Suppose there is fixed currency, F, with inferior transactional properties, and an inflationary currency, I, with superior transactional properties (througput per second, etc.)

Now if you are a HODLer where do you invest? Well if you invest in I, over time your dilution is paying for those other people to have good transactional properties. If you invest in F, you don't loose in that way!

Of course you might speculate that the ultimate world-wide tranasctional value of I is currently under valued, so you might do better to buy I. But notice this MUST be a time-limited situation. At some point the market cap of I must approach or cross the transactional value of I. This is basic math.

In that case, F, again becomes the favored currency for HODLers. Of course there is always gold. It has a much longer track record than Bitcoin. But bitcoin gives all the advantages of crypto... and over time will grow to have the psychological advantages of legacy.

Of course Bitcoin could be replaced by a non-inflationary alternative with better properties. Maybe. But the lost is of psychological value from "legacy" would be LARGE, so it would have to be much better.

I think the only way this will happen is by agreed upon hard fork or by inventing a currency that is interchangable with bitcoin, and slowing having HODLers move over.

fun article!