He explains that the amount of Bitcoin rewarded for mining is halved every four years which means that it will be less profitable...
this statement is incomplete!
...be less profitable... IF
1. price remains the same or drops
2. hashrate remains the same or increases
first of all history shows that price rises because of this supply cut to half. every halving price surges upwards. secondly if mining become "less profitable" miners will leave and with decrease in hashrate it become "more profitable" again. and with the high and increasing price that is not a problem.
But ultimately the number of new Bitcoins coming into existence through mining will be cut to zero. We’ll hit the 21 million limit and the only direct financial incentive left to mine Bitcoin will be transaction fees and there’s an open question as to whether or not the transaction fees will provide a sufficient financial incentive to maintain the kind of computing power that Bitcoin enjoys today which is essential to its security..
that is going to happen in about a hundred years!
If the computational power applied to the Bitcoin network is reduced sufficiently it arguably makes it easier to mount a 51 per cent attack to disrupt the network and so there could be some issues down the road if the rewards are not sufficient.
true, but not for a very long time and there are a lot of things that can easily be done to prevent it. a simple algorithm change comes to mind to change the PoW, and lots of other things.
discussing these things a long way before they even become a thing and without mentioning the simple solutions is very misleading in my opinion.