Can Bitcoin Be Destroyed?

[L E G E N D A R Y]

In that case, do you think they will be able to reach every blockchain or will they be able to create copies of them?

lol that’s a silly question there . And it’s not about reaching the blockchain or even getting a copy of the blockchain, because anyone can basically have a copy of the blockchain in your computer or your hard drive, that doesn’t strengthen the blockchain or Bitcoin in anyway, on the contrary it even helps to strengthen the network more and more.

What I meant is if a person or an attacker able to locate every single person/computer that’s in possession of the blockchain info, and is actually able to destroy those computers, which is actually probably impossible you know.

And yeah a lot of hackers have tried in the past but it lol failed. Just like the 2010 Value Overflow Attack, where an attacker actually exploited a bug to create over 184 billion BTC in just one single transaction. But developers were able to detect it as soon as possible and were able to fix the bug within a few hours sooner than expected, the invalid transaction was able to be wiped off the blockchain through a network upgrade.

[johnsaributua]

We can't know whether Bitcoin will exist forever. But under the current circumstances, we can be reasonably confident that it won't suddenly disappear. If it ever did, it would be an extremely rare event and completely beyond our control. The same could happen to any other asset as well, and no exception. So thinking about it is unnecessary and a waste of time.

I think so too because currently there are no obstacles whatsoever that make us not need to think too far about what will happen in the future because many parties want Bitcoin to always be safe and controlled forever, especially as currently many parties are very confident in Bitcoin which plays a role as something that is in the interests of investment for those who make investments so more precisely in my opinion for the future it will be safer and always think about Bitcoin which is full of confidence for us as parties involved in this Bitcoin forum, especially thinking about things that are not beneficial for us, it is better not to think or do things that tarnish Bitcoin.

[reagansimms]

We can't know whether Bitcoin will exist forever. But under the current circumstances, we can be reasonably confident that it won't suddenly disappear. If it ever did, it would be an extremely rare event and completely beyond our control. The same could happen to any other asset as well, and no exception. So thinking about it is unnecessary and a waste of time.

Yes, no one knows if Bitcoin will be around forever, but I am very sure, Bitcoin will not disappear suddenly because its network is decentralized, it is almost 17 years old, during that time it has been able to survive various crises that occurred in 2013, 2017, 2021, the Chinese ban, FTX collapsed, but the network is still running. Bitcoin is also starting to be adopted by countries like El Salvador and several large companies, the more parties consider it important, the stronger its presence becomes. Having come this far and survived all the challenges, it would take an extraordinary event for Bitcoin to suddenly disappear, such as an internet apocalypse, a nuclear war, all developers quitting, or a fatal bug that cannot be fixed. I think the probability is very small.

Now let me take a real-life example. No one can guarantee that a plane will not crash, but we still fly because the pilots are professional, the planes are well-maintained, and the statistics are that they are safe. If you keep thinking about the plane crash, you will only become more stressed and won't be able to enjoy the flight. I think Bitcoin is the same, we just need to focus on education, security, and strategy to enjoy the long-term results.

[YOSHIE]

Can Bitcoin Be Destroyed?

Technically, Bitcoin cannot be completely destroyed as you say, you definitely know the true nature of Bitcoin and also how Bitcoin itself works, the blockchain, computers as storage of transaction data throughout the world and also the true nature of Bitcoin decentralized, but Bitcoin can be used in extreme scenarios to make the price of Bitcoin worthless or the value of the ecosystem is damaged.

For example, if you carry out an extreme destructive scenario.
One thing that can be done is by the government carrying out extreme regulations simultaneously, such as all countries banning mining, exchanges, Bitcoin users and so on.
Likewise, by carrying out a global internet blackout, you can definitely imagine the negative things that will happen to Bitcoin, if the internet and electricity flow globally is cut off, of course the Bitcoin network will automatically stop functioning, but Bitcoin will still be there, nodestroyed.

[B-BossMan]

I didn't quite pick any reason that you mentioned that would really destroy Bitcoin
This is the beauty of a decentralized money like Bitcoin.
Even if magically everybody stops using it miners and node abandon it
It's just temporary offline
Because it can be continued as long as there's a saved copy of the data existing.

Wow.  From my perspective, the existence of the software comes off as a bit weak as an example, @Ambatman, even though you may well be "technically" correct.

I would think that it is better to say that bitcoin is still alive as long as at least two computers are running it's software (maybe mining it?).. but yeah, maybe you don't need two to mine, but one to mine and the other to validate?  I am pretty sure that the very beginning bitcoin software included both nodes and miners in the bitcoin software.

Now I am showing more of my ignorance since I am not exactly any kind of technical genius to know bare minimum requirements to keep bitcoin "alive," but the mere existence of the software is probably not as good as having actual computers running it, and so yeah there could be bad circumstances to take a lot of computers off line or to screw with the difficulty, too.

The Bitcoin was created to keep operating even when the main part of it's foundations are interrupted, it is security actually comes from thousands of independent computers circulating beyond the differents countries in the world, than depending on a single company,organization or Government. If a huge numbers of the bitcoin miners unexpectedly disconnect, new blocks may actually takes a long term to truly process for short period of time. Also the protocol automatically decreases the mining difficulty to match remaining computing power and then allowing the network to returns to its normal functioning. This is one of the biggest factor in bitcoin that makes it remains resilient and stronger. Example of it was what happened in the past years, as of 2021 when China banned mining, almost half of the computers were experienced offline and the network were slowed automatically, then faces little difficulties and later working fine.

[gracreavix]

The strength of Bitcoin lies within it's users. For me, the only way to actually destroy Bitcoin is to poison the minds of the users towards Bitcoin. That can only be the destruction of Bitcoin. But with institutions already adopting and storing Bitcoin, I don't see that actually happening. Bitcoin has come to stay. Even with th me increase of people adopting EFTs over the real Bitcoin can be like a fight against Bitcoin. I won't blame them, because most people will choose convenience over seld custody. That's why we are here to educate them more about Bitcoin and what it stands right prove as a digital asset.

[samadam007]

Even with th me increase of people adopting EFTs over the real Bitcoin can be like a fight against Bitcoin. I won't blame them, because most people will choose convenience over seld custody. That's why we are here to educate them more about Bitcoin and what it stands right prove as a digital asset.

Spot Bitcoin ETFs still buy and hold real Bitcoin. The main difference is the investor will not be able to control it directly. Instead, a company will hold it for them. That is different from being against Bitcoin.

Also, it’s wrong to say that most people will choose convenience over self custody. Some people will, but many prefer to hold their own Bitcoin because they want full control of their money. People make different choice that base on what they know and what they need. Sound Bitcoin education should explain benefits and the risks of both approaches, so they can understand the benefits they gain and they give up with self custody, ETFs and the other custodial service. Then they can pick the one that’s best for them

[Popkon6]

In order to completely destroy Bitcoin, the attacker would have to reach out to every copy of the blockchain as well as every single node and possibly eliminate them all so as to prevent them from continuing the network, because as long as even the smallest number of honest nodes still exists, still have a copy of the blockchain data and can connect to each other, then there’s really no stopping Bitcoin, it’ll most definitely continue. That’s how strong the Bitcoin network is and that’s the power of decentralization.

The Bitcoin network is so strong that it is almost impossible to destroy it, many people have tried and failed. Because its security is very high, even after following extensive strategies, people have not been able to destroy this Bitcoin because it is a decentralized process. In this situation, no matter how strong you make yourself, it is very difficult for you to create a situation that is almost impossible to destroy the Bitcoin network.
That is why Bitcoin has survived for years and is gradually gaining widespread popularity, the more Bitcoin tries to destroy it, the more successful it is.

[JayJuanGee]

Even with th me increase of people adopting EFTs over the real Bitcoin can be like a fight against Bitcoin. I won't blame them, because most people will choose convenience over seld custody. That's why we are here to educate them more about Bitcoin and what it stands right prove as a digital asset.

Spot Bitcoin ETFs still buy and hold real Bitcoin. The main difference is the investor will not be able to control it directly. Instead, a company will hold it for them. That is different from being against Bitcoin.

Also, it’s wrong to say that most people will choose convenience over self custody. Some people will, but many prefer to hold their own Bitcoin because they want full control of their money. People make different choice that base on what they know and what they need. Sound Bitcoin education should explain benefits and the risks of both approaches, so they can understand the benefits they gain and they give up with self custody, ETFs and the other custodial service. Then they can pick the one that’s best for them

You (@samadam007) seem to be making an argument that self-custody and custody on an exchange are largely equal to one another, and you are also seeming to imply that there is some kind of meaningful check on 3rd party custodians to have the coins that they claim to have.

The attack vector is not ONLY related to their potentially not having the coins that they claim to have, but also the obstacles that interfere with transacting with bitcoin without having to jump through various 3rd party obstacles, and surely there are differences in the kinds of ways that 3rd parties hold coins, since with exchanges, usually the customers have a right to take possession of the coins, yet with spot BTC ETF products (and some of the other ways of financializing bitcoin, such as bitcoin treasurers), there is no right to get in-kind redemption since the customer does not own the bitcoin, but instead owns a share in the product that is supposedly either backed up by bitcoin or backed up by assets that are supposedly equivalent value as the asset (in this case bitcoin).

There are developing hierarchies through the government and financial institutions to prefer to acknowledge (and even give benefits) to persons who are holding claims to bitcoin rather than actual bitcoin, since governments, financial institutions and even status quo powers that be (rich) prefer to maintain the control and monitoring mechanisms that don't work so well when private parties (especially poor people) start to transact directly amongst themselves without any disclosures to governments/financial institutions and/or without giving governments/financial institutions abilities to control, pre-censor or add fees (or other burdens) to the transactions.  Probably monitor and control transactions is more important than monetization of transactions, even though monetization can be intermingled into the muddy mess.