What are implications of total satellite destruction on Bitcoin?

[Sevvero]

Russia blew up Russian satellite with an anti satellite missile.

It created lots of debris, like around 1500 pieces.

In space debris moves at such speeds where it will destroy any objects it hits.

Which can eventually lead to Kessler Syndrome. A scenario in which the density of objects in low-Earth orbit is high enough that collisions between objects cause a cascade, with each collision generating space debris that increases the likelihood of further collisions. This leads to space becoming unreachable and all satellites getting destroyed.

Questions:
1) What could be implications of this? Will we still have internet access?

2) How will it impact Bitcoin?

3) What would be best strategy to prepare for a world with impassible space debris surrounding orbit? Which assets will be a safe haven?

[1714678774]

1714678774

[1714678774]

1714678774

[1714678774]

1714678774

[1714678774]

1714678774

[1714678774]

1714678774

[Poker Player]

I just don't get too worked up about possible events that have a very low probability of occurring.

Regarding Bitcoin, in the event of a global Internet outage, the blockchain would still be there for when the Internet is restored but it would obviously be bad for business. Days or weeks without being able to buy, sell and mine Bitcoin would result in many economic losses.

[pooya87]

1) What could be implications of this? Will we still have internet access?
2) How will it impact Bitcoin?
3) What would be best strategy to prepare for a world with impassible space debris surrounding orbit? Which assets will be a safe haven?

1) Not all internet is based on satellites, so yes we can still have internet access. Vast majority of data is transferred through wires not satellites. Even if it did, we would have much more serious things to worry about than bitcoin.
2) It won't
3) You should ask this in a space related forum like https://space.stackexchange.com/ to get expert answers not on bitcoin forum. As for the bitcoin related part, bitcoin is not an asset, it is a currency

[NeuroticFish]

1) What could be implications of this? Will we still have internet access?

The implications are that some of the TV, meteo or military satellites may get damaged at some point sooner or later. Or Elon Musk's internet-to-be chain of satellites. Most that affects you would be TV and maybe meteo. The problem is that any future launch into space - big or small - poses the risk of colliding such debris and getting damaged.
However, there's already a lot of debris up there - some say 500000 objects, some say that's more than 27000.

Your internet is almost certainly terrestrial, so it's not affected at all.

2) How will it impact Bitcoin?

Not at all.

3) What would be best strategy to prepare for a world with impassible space debris surrounding orbit?

Since we still want to send things out of Earth, sooner or later projects like this or this have to become reality and the debris has to be cleared to acceptable levels.

Which assets will be a safe haven?

... really?!

[PrivacyG]

Internet blackout is indeed one of the most feared unfortunate events for today's Bitcoiners.  Sadly however, there are no current measures that we could take to protect our digital assets from this mess.  In the event of a massive long-lasting blackout, there would be such big consequences you would probably not even care about your wealth anymore.  It takes only a few days for the entire supply chain to be completely disrupted.  Imagine THAT happening.

Was Bitcoin mainstream, we would have talked differently.  It is much easier to create a solution when everyone agrees it is for our better good.  If Bitcoin was mainstream, we would most likely have a solution to this issue: possibly a wallet functioning as a mesh network for areas where internet is unavailable.

But the likelihood of a blackout to be caused by a chain of satellite destruction is probably not much different to the likelihood of a solar storm destroying electronics in an EMP style.  Yes, you can protect SOME of your electronics by placing them in various metal crates.  But once the storm's consequences begin, you will be left with a piece of hardware that successfully boots up but is completely useless .. well, you and only a few thousand more people on this world have been prepped for this moment, so having a phone post-EMP helps you with exactly nothing.

What you can do instead is simply put your eggs into multiple baskets.  If you are holding Bitcoin ONLY, I think you are doing wrong.  Should Bitcoin collapse, you should be prepared by owning other kind of assets.  In the event of a blackout.. which will successfully outlive its consequences?  Is it the Bitcoin owners?  Is it the silver owners or is it the ones that held fiat "under their mattress"?  Bitcoin is digital and it definitely does come with a few cons, one of which is the situation you are describing.  So, prepare yourself accordingly.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[yazher]

3) What would be best strategy to prepare for a world with impassible space debris surrounding orbit? Which assets will be a safe haven?

I think number 3 should have some little chance to affect us when it will hit our home out of nowhere. Maybe it's best to consider keeping our hard wallet where it won't be affected when debris fell into our home. I think we should have some like underground safe where we keep some of our important data.

[Welsh]

If it's a problem, it's not going to be a problem just for Bitcoin. If it's effecting services on a mass scale, then it's likely that a clean up operating is organised. Technically, I believe nothing would be a safe haven, since I believe the Russians are developing this not only to potentially attack, and defend satellites, but also to avoid the existing missile defenses of other countries, and be able to hit them from above undetected.

So, technically our very livelihood could be threatened. Though, as most things it's likely going to be counteracted by similar technology from others, and they'll be a stand still.

A lot of threats that exist for Bitcoin, aren't only a threat to Bitcoin. That's actually one of our strengths, since we don't have a centralised figure to try, and protect Bitcoin when things go south, unlike banks for example. However, we don't need it because much of what Bitcoin is about, how it functions, and who uses it, if Bitcoin becomes effected by something that could potentially hinder it, other services would be effected too. This also goes for the quantum computer argument.

[BlackHatCoiner]

We've used to live with the internet nowadays just like we did with television, phone, fridge; it has become a need. Therefore, it's pretty obvious that if we somehow lost it, we may have some hard crisis due to that fact. It depends on how we'd lose it. If it's the solar storm, that media have stated, then I suspect cryptocurrencies to gain the least attention.

We will probably starve to death.

As for the bitcoin related part, bitcoin is not an asset, it is a currency

I sometimes wonder how a so knowledgeable person like you thinks so closed-mindedly.

[Upgrade00]

This question is quite similar to the 'how will quantum computing affect Bitcoin'? Both scenarios are major disasters that would affect everyone globally and lead to losses in billions of dollars, but Bitcoin seems to be the primary concern.
it seems the purpose of questions like these is to verify how fool proof Bitcoin truly is and if it can truly stand the test of time besides natural occurrence.

As has been mentioned, Bitcoin would survive a situation like this and would still be usable. A meteorite hitting earth and destroying all live on it seems like a deal breaker though.

[hatshepsut93]

For now Bitcoin relies on the good old cable Internet. If this space debris problem will be big enough to prevent satellite Internet and Bitcoin satellites operated by companies like Blockstream, then you could say that this is a negative event, because it cancels the argument that if you shut down the Internet, Bitcoin will still work.

But I would say that if we'll live in a society where Internet can be shut down or totally controlled, we'll have much bigger problems than Bitcoin not working.

[pooya87]

I sometimes wonder how a so knowledgeable person like you thinks so closed-mindedly.

That was a mild joke that I like to make in most cases like in all doomsday scenarios where people are worried about "assets" whereas in a real scenario they would be running after shelter, food, water, etc.

[slaman29]

Ok this is getting way beyond my head reading about this. Bitcoin has a lot more things to worry about before we think about this.

Like, for example, how do we get an easier to use wallet so that newbies don't get so afraid to see all the signing transactions and broadcasting and choosing coins and inputs and fee to pay:)

[Ucy]

A well decentralized Bitcoin would still continue to run even if the whole space is covered in debris because it won't be dependent on only space or satellite. It's not even reasonable for a decentralized network/system to depend only on on space or few other means for internet. You will need wide range of internet sources to be considered properly decentralized. And it's better to use some sort of decentralized internet/intranet. Decentralization has to touch all areas of Bitcoin Network, not just in mining, running nodes, with network participants, internet etc. This is important to eliminate a Single Point of Failure for the Bitcoin Network/System. Properly decentralized could also means it's anti-fragile and won't easily shutdown or break no matter what ia thrown at it. The only thing that can easily shut it down is a SUPREME BEING that is above all human intelligence and creations.
So, one of the best ways to prevent such scenario is to avoid depending on space or satellites alone

[BlackHatCoiner]

That was a mild joke that I like to make in most cases like in all doomsday scenarios where people are worried about "assets" whereas in a real scenario they would be running after shelter, food, water, etc.

If it was a “mild joke”, then excuse me for my lack of humor. I've just seen you again rejecting the asset & investment characterization when it comes to bitcoin. Yes, it's a currency, but it's also an investment and an asset. Just because someone uses it only for their investment portfolio doesn't exclude the other two. Same goes for a person who sees it exclusively as a currency.

Like, for example, how do we get an easier to use wallet so that newbies don't get so afraid to see all the signing transactions and broadcasting and choosing coins and inputs and fee to pay:)

There's no other way. They have to educate themselves.

A well decentralized Bitcoin would still continue to run [...]

No, you don't understand. Every electronic device won't work in the scenario of a solar storm, not just satellites.

[giammangiato]

Russia blew up Russian satellite with an anti satellite missile.

It created lots of debris, like around 1500 pieces.

In space debris moves at such speeds where it will destroy any objects it hits.

Which can eventually lead to Kessler Syndrome. A scenario in which the density of objects in low-Earth orbit is high enough that collisions between objects cause a cascade, with each collision generating space debris that increases the likelihood of further collisions. This leads to space becoming unreachable and all satellites getting destroyed.

Questions:
1) What could be implications of this? Will we still have internet access?

2) How will it impact Bitcoin?

3) What would be best strategy to prepare for a world with impassible space debris surrounding orbit? Which assets will be a safe haven?

Any catastrophic event, as in this case, compromises many more important things than bitcoin, the network stops is not a problem, you do not lose btc along the way, certainly a collapse, but they are apocalyptic scenes! In any case, in addition to satellites, there are many other ways for the network ...

[dkbit98]

What could be implications of this? Will we still have internet access?

This is not the first or latest satellite to be destroyed, and internet worldwide connection is made with bunch of underground and underwater cables and has nothing to do with any satellites and I don't know why so many people assume something like this.

2) How will it impact Bitcoin?

it can only affect Blockstream and other satellites if something hits them, but it's unlikely anything like this will happen.

3) What would be best strategy to prepare for a world with impassible space debris surrounding orbit? Which assets will be a safe haven?

I think you watch a lot of sci-fi movies and you can't do anything about that, so better try changing some things in your life that you actually can change.
Use Bitcoin, stop trusting your government politicians and don't blindly obey them or their rules and regulations.

[slaman29]

Like, for example, how do we get an easier to use wallet so that newbies don't get so afraid to see all the signing transactions and broadcasting and choosing coins and inputs and fee to pay:)

There's no other way. They have to educate themselves.

I am with you on this but remember, back in the day there was no other way to use email except to understand routing and pop and smtp and set everything up yourself but then yahoo and hotmail and everything came along and changed all of it so people all can use email now without educating themselves about how it worked.

The challenge was for email to make itself friendlier which it eventually did.

I know it's not a great example but anyway that to me is a bigger implication than satellite destruction!

[davis196]

It's getting weird how Bitcoiners are trying to connect every possible event that happens with it's potential impact over Bitcoin/blockchain.   Bitcoin will be fine.The blockchain doesn't rely on satellites that much.
If there's was a real possibility of a Kesler Syndrome,then why would Russia destroy their satellite by using a missile?Wouldn't this lead to the destruction of other Russian satellites?Would the Russians shoot themselves in the foot in such a ridiculous way?I think that the Russians aren't that stupid.