Bitcoin Forum

A lot of people have their breaking point, where they will throw in the towel. What "event" or "change in technology" will be

your final nail in the coffin for your Bitcoin dreams? A lot of people are looking at the Bitcoin price as a trigger, but that would

be stupid. (The price are mostly manipulated, so this is a bad guideline)

The trigger must be something other than the price. (Example : Major change in the Bitcoin code / Core developer leaving /

Flaw in the protocol / The introduction of a much better technology etc.)

Let's see how many different triggers could cause a mass exodus of Bitcoin supporters.  ::) ???

Bitcoin as we all know is used to make safe and secure transactions anywhere in the world,and the best part of it all is that it is not controlled,insured or regulated by any government or Central Bank whatsoever..
  I think what could trigger me to abandone this platform is if at some point in time,government gains control of the bitcoin,and the management of the network is no longer in the hands of the users or investors.
  To put it in a single word if the bitcoin becomes "centralized"and subject to governing bodies such as our federal government...For me that could be the nail in the coffin and the straw that breaks the camels back.

Well I have great reason that I am involved in bitcoin. Bitcoin is the biggest and most valuable coin in the cryptocurrency world and it has done greatly.
 Right now there is no logical reason to leave bitcoin but one of the reasons that will make me leave bitcoin is if bitcoin becomes a security token thereby making it under the regulations of external bodies like sec, or any governmental bodies

Bitcoin as a digital asset was created to serve as an alternative to fiat currencies. And afford users freedom and control over their assets, lossing that control would possibly make me leave bitcoin.



A flaw in the protocol is unlikely, but it could also trigger me to leave.
I would be forced out of bitcoin, if there it is flippened by another currency, with better applications and utility (and increased adoption), I don't know if this counts as a better technology.

But if BTC is usurped in terms of market capitalization, value and adoption, I would switch to the other currency. (bitcoin would stiil be an alternative).

Probably some things like the government implementing a heavy ban on bitcoin. Heavy meaning point-a-gun-in-your-head level ban. Though quite unlikely, it's still theoretically possible. Take note that this is just in an "investment" perspective though. If such thing comes to existence, I expect people to be panic selling. No doubt. I definitely would still be interested in bitcoin, but of course I wouldn't want my holdings to decrease in value by a huge percentage as I definitely would still want to live a decent life(and not in poverty).

As with all currency. Cryptocurrency has it own risk. The more prominent risk are government involvement, fraud, theft, volatility, technical failures, regulatory uncertainty and competition from other currency. One of this risk can make any crypto loses is value and that include bitcoin
 But bitcoin has done well to bridge this lapses that why I have a strong believe in it but the only reason I would leave bitcoin is when all this risk are compromised

seems your words are about a government centralisation attempt
how about not be concerned with senators/ministers. they are not the ones writing bitcoin code. and there are 200+ countries so a minister/senator cannot rule a law that bitcoin code has to be wrote a certain way


and instead think bitcoin can be centralised by a group of certain influencers
such as a banking group who have devs on the employ. and the banking group have ownership of a portfolio of merchant tool/exchange services.

where this group want to shout that bitcoin is dead and the only solution is using other networks that function like the fortknox->banker permissioned/managed accounts model

This one might be one of the strongest contenders for me leaving the Bitcoin scene. Unfortunately this is happening faster than

what most people might be realizing. Take for instance how many people are using centralized exchanges that are governed

by strict KYC/AML regulations. These requirements is totally destroying "pseudo-anonymity" and a lot of people do not know

this or they simply do not care about this.  >:(

The only nail in the coffin for me would be if Bitcoin somehow became a closed-source and permissioned system.  A "walled garden" where people weren't able to view or modify the source, or create the software they wanted to create.  Freedom is the most important thing for me.

a situation where people end up having to follow a certain reference roadmap. where people cant independently propose changes that counter such roadmap, all they can do is make software that follows a roadmap...
anyone who does try to create software that allows its own proposal plans, even if that proposal plan has no mandatory deadlines is treated like hostile. and told to get off the network?

Who will dictate this roadmap? A few individuals or a government or Financial institutions? Is this not what we are seeing with

Alt coins like Ethereum and Ripple? Someone must make the call, to decide what will be accepted and what not, so what kind

of consensus mechanism would you suggest to keep decisions like this, decentralized? This is a tricky subject, but I am very

curious about your opinion on this.  ???

This one too. Though this is definitely very unlikely in my opinion, as it's literally the opposite of what bitcoin is trying to achieve. GitHub keyholders makes the bitcoin repo private? I'm pretty sure some other dude can make another github repo with the same code as bitcoin core is open source anyway. Scary concept though, if you think of it.

"someone must make the call" ??? ... um no. thats the centralised mindset.
solution
not having a reference client that has a moderation policy and a 3 step judging system to even get a proposal wrote to code. and only the proposals that fit their roadmap get accepted.

instead allow the community to make their nodes have different offerings and let consensus play out.
in other words an open network of roads where the majority of vehicles offer alternative routes. and after time if it shows the majority without penalty of being thrown out of town for not going a certain road(mandatory diversion at date X), again without mandatory diversions. if there is a majority of natural traffic flow going through certain roads. that that becomes the natural main road.

a reference client mandating a route and blind followers is not consensus
but people following the majority without mandate or threat. is consensus, plus if the road ends up being wrong they still can change direction without needing a reference client to decide for them

saying a network without orphans is good.. is saying a network without choice is good. a road without junctions is good.

having open roads and people choose not to use them is better than only having one road designed by one group which people are mandated to follow

The only issue would be when regulated it would act as per the government norms making it centralized totally.This situation would be ridiculous for many investors as the price would be stabilized by then and governments wouldn't allow large fluctuation of prices due to investors money is concerned.So i think this would be the situation when all btc investors would feel like they are in a coffin.

The current one.  There's nothing wrong with it, despite what franky1 might claim.  He's just throwing tantrums because he can't get his own way.



You don't have to follow a certain roadmap.  You are free to create a client that proposes an entirely new roadmap.  The problem you seem to be having is that people either:

a) don't approve of your proposed roadmap, or
b) don't have a particularly strong opinion one way or the other and are just going with the flow, or
c) are already using another coin that has a similar roadmap to the one you keep whining BTC should have

If more people felt the way you do, the current roadmap wouldn't be the current roadmap.  Or do you think all these thousands of BTC nodes are being run just for the fun of it?  Each of those nodes is testament to the fact that BTC's present course is locked in and you can't do anything to change it, unless you can build a layer on top of Bitcoin that is more to your liking.  You're free to do that too.

I see what you're doing.  You want more people to feel the way you do.  That's why you're taking thinly-veiled potshots at the current roadmap in most of the topics you participate in.  No one's falling for it.

predicted insult confirmed

the refernce client roadmap only under 40% traffic.
both of wanting to use their route between november 2016 and summer 2017.
and also under 40% now of wanting to use their vehicles designed for their route.
but lets address the summer of 2017
obviously that was not good enough stats for the reference client teams roadmap to be the main road. and so
there was a mandated follow only this route and comply to only this route or find yourself moved out of town.
that is not consensus

even the misdirection alternative road called segwit2x was designed by the same group to appear like people could travel a different direction in august while remaining in the same town. but by november they realised that road was never a new direction but a one way street that u-bends back to the reference clients road

but why. i predict the standard reply. if you dont like the town with only one road. get out of town

A regulation in my country so strict that it decides to ban any cryptocurrency activity. When you use an exchange with your bank account it's easy to know you're in crypto. I am not ready and it doesn't worth to be jailed for something just financial. I could move to another country but I love mine. The Gaule will rule the world

Bitcoin is the largest and most valuable coin in the world of cryptocurrency and has been done very well. At present there is no logical reason to leave bitcoin but one reason if bitcoin becomes a security token that makes it under government regulations.

that's the reason why I'm involved in bitcoin

That event for me would be the moment a hard fork like BCH succeeds in taking over BTC place that would be the true nail. I believe that there is no possibility that BTC would become a centralized currency and with all the attempts we are seeing from everywhere to control BTC I don't see anyone that have a chance to do so, the centralization of BTC is something I am not worried about because it's never gonna happen, people are mixing the centralization of the exchanges with BTC which is totally different and totally unrelated to BTC itself.

The centralization would come from a fork of BTC, not BTC itself.

You can always move temporarily, because a lot of people are doing that. My neighbour stays here in Summer and then he

relocates to another country for 6 months to avoid the cold winter. Alternatively, you could spend your bitcoins on a lavish

Bitcoin holiday in another country, where Bitcoin is allowed. A ban is not the ultimate way to stop Bitcoin, it just fills the tax

pockets of other countries where it is allowed.  ;D

That's because most Bitcoin developers support that roadmap. Not just Core developers, but Bitcoin developers generally. It's not because there's some secret cabal that's dictating the future of Bitcoin development.

As FOSS, Bitcoin development is consensus-based. Sorry, but there is no charity for unpopular ideas.

If alternative implementations were relevant in terms of developer activity, robustness and testing, they would be more relevant to the direction of Bitcoin development as well. But... they're not relevant.

price is important of course because even if we deny it, we have "invested" in bitcoin but it is not the determining factor for my involvement with bitcoin or for owning. that factor is mostly the decentralization feature and the fact that bitcoin is  censorship resistant.
basically for me bitcoin has a certain definition. a decentralized currency without any limitations. if any of these attributes change and some day i feel that bitcoin is no longer satisfying then i will stop using it no matter what the price is or where it is headed.

I think the nail in the coffin moment for me will be if I found out that some government agency developed Bitcoin to take control of people's wealth. It has happened before that some agencies created honey traps to trace money derived from criminal activities and they even infiltrated Tor exit nodes.

I entered Crypto currencies, because it gave me some financial privacy <not for criminal use>, so if I found out that this was only a smoke screen, then I would definitely exit the scene.   >:(

Yes, some of the key features of Bitcoin is not negotiable. The main problem is the services that are attached to the

technology. People are not using Bitcoin in the way that it was designed to be used, namely as a P2P payment network and

the direct consequence of that is the fact that many of these features are being destroyed by the 3rd party services that are

being used. (Examples : Exchanges / Wallet providers / Payment processors etc.) We need to go back to the White paper and

reconsider the vision that Satoshi had for Bitcoin. We are selling that vision for "Ease of use" / "Profit" / "Convenience" and

to bend over for government acceptance.  >:(

that may already be happening with certain altcoins such as Ripple and Ethereum and Dash and are the most centralized and somewhat shady coins  that are controlled and managed by centralized groups of people but that can not happen with bitcoin as long as we keep it decentralized like it is today.

I supported what you said. Although, vitcoin have proof it worth during the time of high criticism and FUD by the government but we both know that the goovernment know to do things for their own selfish reason. Therefore, world wide totally ban will be the reason for me to nail in coffin my bitcoin goals.

"Surrounded wall garden" where people can not view or modify the source or create the software they want to create. That is the most important thing for me.

it is interesting that 4 users already mentioned ban as their "nail in the coffin" i wonder if this is a majority thing since this topic doesn't have that many replies yet. maybe a poll would be nice?
i myself don't care about bans. in fact one of the reasons why i am using bitcoin is the fact that nobody can "ban" me from using it. so i don't see how a ban can change my mind.

A much better technology would definitely drove me away from Bitcoin. I mean there's no point holding on to previous tech when it has been outperformed by the latest one. Just like how fiat and other digital payment would be outperformed by Bitcoin in a few years.

I doubt there would be a major flaw in the protocol considering how cautious the developers are making a change to the code. Most bugs are not threatening so far. Also, if the environment of Bitcoin has drifted from the values that I believe in, I would leave Bitcoin too.

I don't see a ban as the "nail in the coffin" but I wouldn't say I don't care. When it comes to small countries like Algeria, it's insignificant.

What about a coordinated ban among world superpowers? How robust is Bitcoin, if major governments start raiding miners and pushing transactions/mining into the black market? What can we do to make it more robust, so that miners and users can safely operate under such conditions?

I'm just interested if bitcoin is under government control, but I think it will make bitcoin safer again. but from that, I also have a reason why I have to go, that is if the government limits the number of transactions from other countries, or takes high taxes on it.

that probably wouldn't happen in our lifetime since bitcoin is the new technology that was created to replace the old one and also because bitcoin is also advancing, it didn't stop at 9 years ago. the foundation of it is the same but it has been improving and adding additional features. for example with LN there will be another 100 steps forward for bitcoin.

You got a crystal ball or something? :P

Bitcoin does have its drawbacks after all. Decentralization is inefficient and costly for users, and POW mining consumes a lot of power.

What if technology emerges that solves third party trust without some / all of those downsides? A lot of people are definitely working on it. I know the technology doesn't exist today, but it would be silly to write off that possibility.

I am not to bothered by other Alt coins, because I am primarily invested into Bitcoin.  ;) The conspiracy theorist side in me says that Mike Hearn & Gavin were working for these agencies and that they were mandated to take control over Bitcoin and it failed with Bitcoin XT, so in my opinion there were attempts by these agencies to take control.

I am more bothered that all of this was simply smoke & mirrors and that they developed Bitcoin from the start.  ??? ::)

there has definitely been a lot of take over attempts in the past, both directly for taking over bitcoin itself or indirectly to take over bitcoin by pumping their altcoins and making people move their money there. for example Dash that was mentioned is one of the groups that funded the spam attacks of last year against bitcoin to increase the backlog and the fees so that they could advertise their coin more and get it used more.... they failed in the end though.

well that is a very extreme case you are describing here and in that case it would become some sort of exception to what i said. obviously nobody wishes to use something that is globally banned and has a bad reputation because of it.

but i do believe that this will never happen which is why i said what i said above. it is more about one country (like India for example) banning usage of bitcoin while the rest of the world have been adopting bitcoin with open arms.

Yes, bans has worked so great for drugs and alcohol before it. If the is still around, then Bitcoin will still be around. Technically you just one miner, powerful enough to transactions, so really, they cannot ban Bitcoin.


The breakout will be when the those that lead the FEC, decide to buy some, and thus are forced to recongnize it was worthy.

Personally, I don't think I'd have a problem with that.  Call me blasé, but if it did turn out to be one of the three-letter-agencies who were responsible for opening Pandora's Box, the simple truth is, it's out of their hands now.  It's no longer controllable by them or anyone else.  

Regardless of where it came from, it's ours now.

I don't think that something will happen that will actually influence on my dedication to bitcoin.
Price is important, that is true but it's not the only factor that keeps me with bitcoin as for now I see other advantages that with time will only become more significant so I don't have intention to give up.

Yes, bans have worked so great for drugs and alcohol before it. If the internet is still, the Bitcoin will still be around and thriving. There no way the superpowers can get rid of all mining operation, and even if they did, then Bitcoin would return to the little men, and minable with GPUs and CPUs again. Superpowers are likely to race to create the biggest mining operation possible, to control as much of Bitcoin has they can.


That will be the next arms race, Cryptocurrency Mining/Stalking Supremacy.


Bitcoin breakout will come from FEC stamp of approval.

if I work according to risk management, I have considered all possible risks.  including the conversion of the bitcoin price to zero. so I will be in cryptocurrency until the end, whatever it is.

With all this uncertainty about central organisations backing up cryptocurrencies in general, I think the biggest booster to the crypto market economy is bigger adoption and acceptance by there organisations.

when we see a lot of whales selling their bitcoin assets for other interests, then that event will be a coffin for bitcoin.

the reality is like today, bitcoin creates a graph down when the hash battle between BCHABC and BCHSV.