Bitcoin's 10000 TH network is extremely vulnerable

[runam0k]

But $400 million (or a bit more) isn't a lot of money for players such as GS or JPM Chase. If such banks start seeing BTC as a threat somewhere down the line, I'm sure they'd be willing to spend a measly 400 m. to take it down. That's just the cost of doing business for them, just like paying $ 80 billion fines. It's a small sum for the megabanksters, and a sum they'd gladly spend if it meant they got rid of a serious competitor.

You're nuts if you think a big bank would ever do this. Even if it is chump change to them, which it probably is, they simply would not do it.

Just like they don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying to crush other competitors in this way. It would lead to criminal prosecutions, massive lawsuits and irrevocable damage to reputation.

A country maybe, but they'd have to really want to do it. Which means Bitcoin would have to be very significant. Which means many times its current size. Which means very significantly more difficult to bring down.

[exocytosis]

Just like they don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying to crush other competitors in this way. It would lead to criminal prosecutions, massive lawsuits and irrevocable damage to reputation.

JPM and other megabanks face lawsuits all the time. Didn't JPM recently pay a fine of $ 80 billion or something on that order of magnitude? It didn't hurt them one bit, since it's just the cost of doing business for them. They're expecting such fines anyway, so they make sure they have the cash to spend whenever the shit hits the fan.

And does it look like Jamie Dimon or Lloyd Blankfein cares about their reputation? Remember, these players are so well-connected in political and judicial circles that they're never going to jail anyway. At most their banks get some silly 100 billion dollar fine before continuing doing business as usual. It's nothing to them, and what reputation they do have isn't hurt the slightest by crushing something as small and insignificant as a cryptocurrency. And if it is hurt, they don't care anyway. (Arguably, their reputation (among the common man) has already gone down the drain for the last five years or so. Yet, they continue doing business as usual.)

I want Bitcoin to succeed. That's why I hope someone can address the OP's points.

Yes, it's a game of whack-a-mole, since a dozen other cryptocurrencies pop up if the banksters decide to destroy BTC. But can cryptocurrency as a concept ever truly succeed (i.e. achieve mainstream adoption) if it's just destroyed every time some serious financial player sees it as a threat?

Currently, BTC is tiny, so the megabanks lack incentive to destroy it. It's not a real threat to them yet.

But hey, I'm a newbie, so maybe I'm totally wrong. That'd be a relief for me.

[JohnsonRobinson]

I actually hope BTC fails so other more advanced alts can take its place.

Time for bitcoin to be retired imo. Its a prototype that's run its course. It's served us well, but its time to move on. There's much better altcoins around.

Just curious what you would rank as the top few to get into as a hedge.

[runam0k]

At most their banks get some silly 100 billion dollar fine before continuing doing business as usual.

You'd think so, but that's not strictly true.

Banks regularly test the limits of what they are allowed to do to make money. When they go too far they are fined, they have all sorts of internal meetings and investigations, procedures are put in place and people will (and do) get pushed out.

Then they immediately start to test the limits of what they are allowed to do to make money.

I agree, the levels of fines and the lack of jail time/senior management heads rolling is unfortunate - signs of our weak/compomised law enforcement agencies and powerless shareholder boards.

Of course none of that means GS or any other megabank would go so far as to sit down and say, "let's spend $50m to break Bitcoin". That goes well beyond testing the limits of what they are allowed to do to make money.

It's nothing to them, and what reputation they do have isn't hurt the slightest by crushing something as small and insignificant as a cryptocurrency.
...
Currently, BTC is tiny, so the megabanks lack incentive to destroy it. It's not a real threat to them yet.

As you rightly point out, it's even less likely now, given the insignificance of Bitcoin, relatively speaking. And when Bitcoin is big enough to cause real concern, squashing it will be next to impossible.

Far more likely, the banks will use their influence to pressure governments and central banks into acting against Bitcoin. Look at what happened in China. Now imagine the US government and Fed making similar declarations.

[wickedgoodtrader]

It will become even more of an issue when block rewards halve and mining becomed unprofitable if the price of btc doesn't rise. Miners will shutdown and drop the hashrate.

[Coin_Master]

If the US government wanted to take bitcoin down, why waste $30mill doing so. They can just declare all aspects of bitcoin usage / trade illegal with severe jailtime. With their influence they could then convince all other western institutionalized countries to do the same thus removing the value of the currency.

Opinions on this forum are getting funnier and funnier.  You think that when the US government declares all aspects of something illegal with threat of severe jail time, that it stops it happening?  If that were true there would be no 'terrorism', no 'murder', no 'cocaine imports from south america'.
Get real man, all it does is drive the price up!