Limited supply is very important principle of Bitcoin philosophy. Bitcoin is volatile, but it also has been deflationary throughout its life.

Of course it's possible.

It's getting everyone to agree to it that'll be the very, very, very, very hard part.

Maybe one day someone will make a concerted effort to do it. Everyone else will laugh in their tits. I'll be drooling in my euthanasia booth by then so don't care.

The only way they might convince someone to do it is if they promote the "21 million Bitcoins aren't enough to the world's population" idea.

But if we think it thoroughly, why would it be a problem if.. say through a hard fork the new Max Supply would be multiplied by x100 (so 2,100,000,000BTC max) and everyone has their balance multiplied x100 simultaneously? If Bitcoin is going to stay in the top as the beast of all cryptocurrencies, it would even with this hard fork happening, right?

Yes, indeed. The real number is the number of satoshis, which approaches 21 million x 100 million. Once you start thinking in satoshis you can see there are plenty of them to do anything. Not sure about the LN further subdivision.

Realistically bitcoins are way too expensive for anything but expensive things, like property, cars, etc. But as someone said, the bitcoin itself is just a cosmetic unit of measure shown in wallets, just like the mBTC, the real one being the satoshi.

Somewhere it was defined 100 million satoshis make a bitcoin, but because this is not in code, we could redefine this without touching anything beyond the cosmetic units displayed. Everyone would just want to agree and that is that.

They could say: "starting tomorrow, the bitcoin is no longer 100 million, but 1 million satoshis." Then those owning 1 bitcoin yesterday tomorrow can say they have 100 bitcoin under the new denomination (1 million satoshis). Obviously if the bitcoin is 10000 USD then it would cost to 100 USD to remain the same, since its the number of satoshis what actually matters.

I wonder if people would get really confused by this? They do that often with fiat that go hyperinflation, not that it means anything beyond "human convenience" for expressing price of things etc. While governments can do that to fiat by decree, i wonder how would the community react to such?

I personally don't mind, but "larger supply" (as in more satoshis) is absolutely not needed.

If I remember correctly, Peter Todd was advocating of removing the 21 million supply cap for bitcoin to have a forever 1% inflation for security purposes. Though his explanation was somewhat reasonable(though I'm not for it), and even though he is a very reputable personality in the bitcoin space, a lot of people disagreed and laughed at the idea. It just shows how changing things this big is very very unlikely to happen.

he never actually advocated for it. he just said bitcoin should have been implemented that way. he knows that it would never happen!

It is pretty exciting to see bitcoin opening its protocol to adopt new improvements and to better fit the needs of the people, but what makes bitcoin the best is its consistency. If bitcoin will have a larger supply, its demand will not increase that much, resulting for people to see bitcoin to end its characteristic to provide better profits in terms of investment. In addition, we just made bitcoin untrustworthy when in the end, we could change its protocol.

People don't make critical decisions in software with millions of user just because they "think" that something should be done, you need to make a proper scientific research where you defend your conjecture with facts, statistically significant data, mathematical calculations, etc.

When I see a question like this posted by a beginner, the first thing that comes to my mind is actually the classic thinking of the average person who thinks that if the total amount of something goes up that the price of the same will go down. If by some miracle the total supply would increase from 21 million, this would definitely cause the price to fall not only because of increased supply but for lack of confidence in BTC.

There are things that need to stay just the way the creator put them, for everything else there are forks of BTC. Not even them (at least the more famous ones) did not interfere with total supply.