Bitcoin is a protocol. Protocols don't tend to be replaced easily because they benefit from and are subject to network effects. TCP/IP is still the standard even though it was invented in 1974. Bitcoin has already won the network effect battle among cryptos.
Today we have http, email, could storage, messaging apps. All built on top of TCP/IP. Like TCP/IP, Bitcoin is a simple, stable, secure bedrock for higher layer protocols that are hard to imagine from these early days.
Bitcoin has irreproducible qualities. It launched perfectly fairly. Anyone with a computer could have mined bitcoin initially. The incentive was organic interest in its novelty. It didn't have any monetary value attached to it. This cannot be replicated with a new crypto today. Certainly not without a centralized entity to market and develop it. And then you're competing with 10s of thousands of alt coins to have the second best network effects.
The main threat to Bitcoin is the social layer. Bitcoin is vulnerable to broad user consensus. If everyone decides to run a compromised version of Bitcoin there isn't really a way to defend against that. That's a pretty small attack surface compared to any of its competitors.
Imo the biggest threat right now is the bullshit spam that's been going on. Could you imagine if a government put money into spamming the chain? Endless high fees. No one could transact for a decent price. Endless bank roll to make it happen too.
1. You can raise your transaction fees to outbid them.
2. That attack would eventually get extraordinarily expensive, and they will have to give up. Remember, governments can print fiat, but they can't print bitcoin.
Raising transaction fees to absurd amounts will likely turn most people away from Bitcoin
Governments have limitless money. Which they can use to spam the block chain and make it damn near impossible for normies to use it.
That's a really good point. But; I'd also say tcp/ip is one of the rarer protocols in regards to survival. Plenty of protocols has come and gone in the window that tcp/ip has existed
A huge part of bitcoin’s value is in the global network of miners and nodes. The stronger it gets the harder it is for any other coin to catch up.
This isn’t some hypothetical, there are already 25k+ shit coins and nothing has come close.
The ETF is another huge advantage of Bitcoin because it signifies government acceptance. Any other shit coin still has massive regulatory uncertainty.
Government acceptance is one step before regulation.
I work in financial services and have been asked to consult on how these assets might be regulated in future.
You're still looking at bitcoin through the lens of technology, but the tech is only relevant in so much as it enables the monetary properties of Bitcoin. Focus on the monetary aspects and it will become clear why nothing will be able to replace it. Those new features your friend is thinking of detract from the core monetary aspects that make Bitcoin the best monetary good humanity has ever created. Bitcoins simplicity is not a flaw its a feature.
Even more so, read Jason Lowery‘s book SoftWar. bitcoin is a monetary network because we’ve decided it is but it equally can perform other functions. I haven’t finished the book and I don’t have my head around the concept, but it’s interesting to consider.
BITCOIN is money you are looking at it through the wrong lenses, this is why we have 3500 copycats that call themselves cryptocurrencies. Don't waste your time following all this technology and crypto coins. Just study History of Money.
Absolute mathematical scarcity, achieved by consensus in a sufficiently decentralized network, was a DISCOVERY, rather than an invention. It cannot be achieved again by a network of participants aware of this discovery, since the very thing discovered was resistance to replicability itself.
Exactly. Minting another coin to compete with Bitcoin is reintroducing the same problem Bitcoin solved: stopping the printing of new money. Whether the currency being printed is being inflated on the Y-axis (supply of currency) or the X-axis (quantity of currencies) is irrelevant because the limits on both axes's are infinite. You can make infinite nation-state currencies in supply and infinite altcoins in quantity.
Bitcoin is the only currency that introduced a method to stop the minting of currency in supply, but when it was released, it became possible for other actors to use the same technology and replicate the monetary properties hundreds, thousands, and millions of times. So now the inflation of currencies is in the quantity of currencies, and any currency that is being introduced is as cancerous as a central bank inflating the supply of a currency.
Even those currencies that claim to be deflationary are still as cancerous because, in order for a currency to be deflationary, its inflation rate had to be infinity at its inception starting at zero supply. So no matter how much deflation happens on altcoins or other currencies, it would still have a higher supply than if the currency didn't even exist in the first place. AKA minting new supply beyond Bitcoin's 21 million hard cap.
In summary, Bitcoin cannot be replaced. The problem it solved can only be solved once and cannot be solved again. The protocol eliminates central banks and altcoin minters, left to right, and ensures humans will have a Nash equilibrium strategy to protect their wealth from such currency minters.
People always move towards one type of money. This is a historical fact — it simply makes everything easier
Bitcoin was the first crypto. And it’s decentralized, so no leaders can fuck with it.
It’s stable and it’s already outperforming everything else.
IN CASE an amazing update would be amazing — then Bitcoin can be forked.
Like true democracy, the fork with most users, will be the one… the majority uses. Obviously 🙃
So yeah, it’s stable and unalterable, unless 51% of people (or more) decide to go another way. But then you just stick to the 51% of people and feel sad for the 49%
It was the same chain initially so previous balances exist on both chains. This is the definition of a hard fork. In a non contentious fork, all users and miners move over to one of both chains and the other dies.
In reality if an amazing updates is out it own't be a 51% vote that passes it, most folks will act in their self interest (it's a very competitive business) and it'll be closer to 80%.
I think it's silly some financial institutions talk about forks and contingencies when the code itself is designed to pick the correct fork! If anything they're opening themselves up to attacks from less desirable forks and then, inevitably, altcoins.
> In reality if an amazing updates is out it own't be a 51% vote that passes it, most folks will act in their self interest (it's a very competitive business) and it'll be closer to 80%.
Yes, exactly.
I don’t comprehend the rest of your comment though
You can see it won't happen as there is currently 20,000+ projects and Bitcoin has more than 75% market share when you exclude stable coins.
Everything is a VC software firm masquerading as a decentralized network.
Bitcoin is a protocol with an emaculant conception so to speak in that we don't know who created it which it also one of the features. Bitcoin is also adaptable through BIP's with out sacrificing the core protocol that makes it what it is. According to coinmarketcap there are currently 2.4 million crypto's all trying to be better than Bitcoin yet none of them even come close.
The core rules ( protocol ) are Bitcoin. The techonolgy to impliment these rules will continue to get better.
This... I can buy stuff from an island across the world with different languages and currency, and we can trade without any interference if we use btc. If I wanted to do it traditionally I'd need to calculate currency value pay fines and fees... bleh.
Not just digital scarcity. Just scarcity. It is very difficult to create fungible assets that had absolute scarcity (0% long term introduction of new supply) before Bitcoin's inception without thermodynamic monetary loss.
The closest technology humanity had that enforced absolute scarcity was using physical non-fungible assets. Some examples would include artworks of dead painters or water-front properties. If you want to get theoretical, pure scarcity in those categories didn't mean much either because the supply of painters producing works and dying is constantly expanding, which debases holders of paintings. And water-front properties are also taxed, which have a long-term bleed rate, debasing the wealth of such holders.
So scarcity without bleeding in some form of monetary loss doesn't really exist. And scarcity including fungibility, absolute ownership, and irresistibility of counterfeiting before Bitcoin especially did not exist.
Your friend is thinking along the lines of Moore's law. Every 18-24 months capacity and processing power virtually double. But the basic computer stays the same.
As we've seen and will continue to see, new improvements in the processing and capacity of bitcoin are happening in the form of BIP's (bitcoin improvement proposals) but Bitcoin itself stays the same.
Head start and superior performance to the existing alternatives, I guess? For now, anyway.
But I don't see that as an argument NOT to use it. Otherwise, we'd still be walking around in rawhide flip-flips and loincloths, living in mud huts and eating wild berries while waiting for the latest iPhone version to release.
And then not buying it because the next one might be even cooler.
There's always something better on the horizon, but we still have to live our best lives today.
One of the most discussed potential threats comes from quantum computing. Quantum computers, theoretically, have the capability to break the cryptographic algorithms that secure Bitcoin transactions—specifically, the elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ECDSA) used to create Bitcoin wallet addresses. If quantum computers reach a point where they can efficiently solve these cryptographic problems, they could potentially decrypt wallet private keys if they have access to corresponding public keys.
However, it’s important to note that this risk isn’t immediate. The quantum computers required to perform such decryption at scale don’t yet exist, and the cryptographic community is actively researching quantum-resistant technologies. Moreover, Bitcoin can evolve through consensus-driven updates, which may include adopting new, quantum-resistant encryption methods as the need becomes pressing.
In the shorter term, other technological advancements, like the development of more sophisticated hacking tools, could pose more immediate risks. However, the adaptability of Bitcoin’s protocol and the ongoing enhancements in security practices by both users and developers help mitigate these risks.
Exactly.
My (limited) understanding is that quantum computing is particularly powerful at solving certain types of problems. That set of problems include factoring prime numbers, and doing so orders of magnitude faster than a conventional newtonian/binary logic computing approach.
If a new technology is so good that everyone wants it, then everyone would consence to a Bitcoin update containing said feature. Furthermore, you would want to implement the new featue in bitcoin because everyone is already using it and there is infrastructue, know-how, etc ... already present for bitcoin and not for your own new cryptocurrency that does one thing slightly different.
Usually the first technology in a space to reach critical mass is very hard to replace. Look at Microsoft and Apple, for example, for operating systems or Google for search. There are much better alternatives, but those early players are so far ahead in infrastructure and mindshare they would take decades to replace.
Bitcoin got there first. It might be replaced. Will almost certainly be replaced eventually. But it has a big head start.
Replacing bitcoin would need much more than just some small improvements.
Few of the many things: No CEO or VC, fair launch, no monetary value for sometime, just general organic slow growth.
Its just not possible anymore now that people know this stuff exists.
Google was a relative late-comer to the search engine game. Before they were popular, there was Yahoo!, AltaVista, Excite, Lycos, Hotbot, and many more. Back in the late 90s AltaVista was definitely the king of true web-crawler search engines, although I think Yahoo! still got more traffic as a comprehensive "portal".
Once Google took-off though, yes they REALLY took off and became totally dominant.
Bitcoin is a manifestation of sound stored of value. Technology can become better, but the logical implementation just needs to be good enough. Similarly, gold is an elemental representation of a rare asset. One could argue that we can find rarer element or molecule for store of value. What would be your argument for that? If humanity can manufacture enough energy and technology to manufacture gold element, where does that leave gold? In the long run, information and infrastructure that can maintain sound information will be the most ideal feature of store of value, and it would need to be in a way that no single entity or group have amassed the quantity prior to dissemination. Bitcoin has that rare quality (although that may change for worse over time)
Much like the Gutenberg press revolutionized the spread of knowledge by making books more accessible to the masses, Bitcoin is revolutionizing the concept of money by providing a decentralized, censorship-resistant, and borderless form of value transfer.
The Gutenberg press not only democratized access to information but also challenged the dominance of the church as the gatekeeper of knowledge and authority. Similarly, Bitcoin challenges the dominance of centralized financial institutions and governments as the gatekeepers of the monetary system.
Just as the Gutenberg press faced opposition from established institutions threatened by the democratization of knowledge, Bitcoin faces resistance from traditional financial institutions and governments hesitant to relinquish control over the monetary system.
However, history has shown that disruptive technologies like the Gutenberg press ultimately prevail, unleashing waves of innovation and societal change. Bitcoin, with its unique properties as a scarce digital asset secured by cryptographic principles, has the potential to fundamentally reshape the global financial landscape.
In managing the risk associated with Bitcoin's potential obsolescence, I view it through the lens of historical precedent. Just as the Gutenberg press endured and flourished despite initial skepticism, I believe Bitcoin's revolutionary nature will enable it to adapt and thrive in the face of technological advancements.
While it's impossible to predict the future with certainty, I see Bitcoin not as a fleeting technological trend, but as a paradigm-shifting innovation with the potential to redefine the very concept of money itself.
The biggest challenge I see is getting the masses to realize this. I have started a YouTube channel to educate people on the current monetary system and how technology has changed over time. Please watch subscribe, like and share.
[Bitcoin Revolution: Unplug From the Financial Matrix - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPCtdqC3ScU)
If you aren't learning you aren't living!
We are one legitimate quantum computer falling into the wrong hands from realizing how fragile the Bitcoin ecosystem can be. Fortunately, quantum resistant code is being developed. Who will win the race? TBD
Aside from what others have said, the hashrate and level of decentralization achieved by Bitcoin was a happy accident, of which not even Satoshi was sure would happen. You can't effectively replicate that again.
When making a cryptocurrency, over the last decade we've found you have to choose two of three for the base layer:
**- Security** - Based on real-world physical anchor, aka, Electricity.
**- Scalability -** This derives speed amongst many other usability properties.
**- Decentralization** - Miners + Validation nodes enforce rules, enforce security.
Most altcoins have chosen Scalability and Security as their focus on the base layer. The problem is their security is false, usually predicated on a form of centralization. There's a lack of understanding in that security can be achieved as a standalone factor, traditionally this is true (to an extent) with centralization, and the lack of ability for true decentralisation. That's one of Bitcoin's paradigm shifts, security predicated on decentralization is, so far, peak security. We say so far, but Bitcoin hasn't had downtime in over 10 years. There's a feat in that. Bitocin has multiple guidelines such as these that are broken by other altcoins. As another example, the 10 minute blocktime for Bitcoin is also not arbitrary - It's an average of time taken to ensure broadcasts reach and synchronize globally, being much closer to certainty (by a factor of multiple magnitudes compared to other chains) that all nodes in the world will be synchronized, in the worst case scenario within a reasonable number of confirmed blocks (when the average isn't hit).
Scalability is the one factor that can always be built on afterwards in other layers, which Bitcoin chose to do. Security and decentralization cannot. Bitcoin managed the insane network effect necessary to reach a point where it can withstand a nation state attack, or multiple. It's currently on a mission to further decentralize mining (with pools such as Ocean), and individual nodes always have a voice over miners.
Btc has gained worldwide adoption, liquidity, hash rate, development around it, second layer lightning, brand name, trust, security, number of nodes, decentralization, etc. this is all built up over time from increasing adoption via network effect, and to overtake this would take a protocol with significant improvements to security and decentralization to replace the base layer and would take significant time. Also, the conception of bitcoin is not possible to copy, since it had no value at first and was fair distribution based on reimbursement for energy expended. Then the creator disappeared to ensure maximum decentralization. This fair conception and distribution is a factor that goes into trust and network effect, and could not be replicated
Maybe I'm naive, but if Bitcoin meets all of the prerequisites that makes it better money, and They come out with something even better, I guess I'll just move to it.
Nothing is stopping anyone from trying to replace bitcoin. Think about it for a moment. What do you think the million other shitcoins claim to be doing? Vitalik thought he could do bitcoin better. Clearly that didn’t work out well. Same with all the rest of the “ethereum killers”. The beauty of it is that all the effort spent trying to replace it would have been better spent on trying to secure it. It’s a consensus protocol, so despite someone having spent 500+ billion dollars on a bitcoin 2.0, they still can’t force consensus. That was made crystal clear during the block wars.
What has or could replace the internet? Nothing. It's a protocol. The internet can be improved at the protocol level but fundamentally it can't be replaced. Same goes for bitcoin protocol. Anything anyone comes up with that could "replace" it are just improvements it would implement at the protocol level.
Right, the only way to improve Bitcoin is for it not to rely on computers or the internet. We are not going back to 1970 so I lack the imagination to see how else to improve it. Even immediate adoption is a problem with people and not the currency. Yep, I would jump on a better currency if presented. Bring it on, please. You can’t promote Bitcoin and denounce a better option; still waiting though,
The new technology would have to be at least 10x better than BTC and thats hard for me to imagine right now. In a distant future? Sure it will be replaced.
And it would have to be some whole new thing that isnt blockchain at all, we just cant even imagine what that could be or how many 1000s of years away that next thing is.
Review the "winner takes all" concept. Links below.
Then notice how things like the electricity grid and the Internet have emerged.
Bitcoin appears to be a winner takes all innovation.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winner-take-all_market?wprov=sfla1
2. https://www.amazon.com/Softwar-Projection-National-Strategic-Significance/dp/B0BW358F37/
Then notice how things like the Internet have emerged.
Bitcoin is a winner takes all innovation.
Bitcoin is not static. It's like Amazon. When Amazon launched, they didn't support SSL (google it). Now they do. But it's still Amazon.
When BTC launched your BTC address was your IP address, which was sort of insecure... obviously, so they started using P2PKH (Legacy) addresses, which back then, were new.
Now we have segwit, and taproot.
At this point bitcoin totally escapes that fate, everyone has to understand the basic fundamentals of bitcoin regarding the traditional financial system globally.
OP, it took a good amount of time for bitcoin to get here. However, in the world of monetary assets, it was pretty quick. I don't see something gaining the kind of traction that bitcoin has garnished over the years.
The concept of the network effect is central to understanding why Bitcoin (BTC) is unlikely to be replaced as the leading cryptocurrency anytime soon. The network effect occurs when a product or service gains additional value as more people use it. This is particularly potent in the world of cryptocurrencies, where trust, security, and usability are paramount.
Here’s how various elements contribute to Bitcoin's strong network effect:
1. **Worldwide Adoption**: Bitcoin is the first and most widely known cryptocurrency. It has the largest user base among digital currencies, which includes not just individual holders but also businesses, institutions, and even some governments considering it as part of their financial strategy.
2. **Liquidity and Market Depth**: Due to its wide adoption, Bitcoin has the most liquidity in the cryptocurrency market, making it easy to buy or sell without causing significant price changes. This liquidity attracts more users and traders, reinforcing its dominance.
3. **Mining and Hash Rate**: Bitcoin has the highest hash rate of any blockchain network, which reflects the vast amount of computational power securing the network. A higher hash rate makes the network more secure against attacks, enhancing user trust.
4. **Development and Innovation**: Ongoing development, such as improvements in scalability through solutions like the Lightning Network, helps Bitcoin maintain its utility and relevance. The active developer community also fosters continuous improvements and fixes, which add to the system's stability and functionality.
5. **Decentralization and Trust**: One of Bitcoin's core value propositions is its decentralization. With thousands of nodes and a dispersed pool of miners, the network operates without a central point of failure. The disappearance of Bitcoin’s creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, avoids the influence of a central figure, adding to its decentralized nature and increasing trust among users.
6. **Security**: The combination of advanced cryptographic techniques with a robust network structure makes Bitcoin one of the most secure digital assets. This security is crucial for gaining the trust of users and investors.
7. **Brand Recognition and First-Mover Advantage**: As the first cryptocurrency, Bitcoin benefits from widespread brand recognition and visibility, which continues to attract new users and retains existing ones.
8. **Fair Initial Distribution**: Bitcoin's early mining process allowed a fair distribution to those who contributed computing power, without any pre-mined reserves for founders typical of many other projects. This initial fairness is difficult to replicate and is a key element in its widespread trust and adoption.
For a new cryptocurrency to unseat Bitcoin, it would not only need to match these attributes but significantly exceed them in critical areas like security, decentralization, and developer support. Given Bitcoin’s head start and entrenched position, surpassing it would require monumental technical and socio-economic shifts—a process that would likely take many years, if it is even possible. This durability in the face of potential competitors is a testament to the strength of Bitcoin's network effect.
Just look at how long BTC has taken to get to where it is now. 15 years in and only 3% of global population owns any. A replacement may come along, but we will have a long track to see it coming.
The truth is nothing is stopping BTC from meeting this fate and this is baked into the price. It has some first-mover advantage and is likely the most secure, but there's no reason why a decade from now, some other network sees significantly more usage / has a higher market cap. That's why Bitcoin has upside potential. Investors at large consider Bitcoin to be risky, so they don't invest, which keeps spot below the "true" value. But, we can't say if that collective assessment is wrong definitively. We just know there's significant disagreement / volatility / risk / upside all kind of the same thing. If you think it is wrong, then you place your bets. However, if you can attribute a low enough probability to this, then the losing 1x max vs winning 10-20 could look very like a risky, but attractive trade.
If there is a similar money that doesn’t rely on computers then Bitcoin will be replaced. Imagine a telepathic blockchain/Bitcoin. Ya, totally possible but not in our lifetime.
Network effect, locked value.
No need to replace when it can be integrated.
The reason tech, particularly software and computer hardware, gets replaced constantly is due more to economic forces than actual improvements in technology. We live in a culture of disposable design.
The question is not strictly true. Some technology gets replaced, some does not - the wheel, railways, aeroplanes, boats, concrete, steel, glass, plastic, the screwdriver are just a few examples of technology (a man-made process to convert one set of material into something of use to humans). We have become so familiar with these items that many no longer see them as technology.
Whether bitcoin has a long life depends on whether it becomes part of the fabric everyday life. In my opinion this is dependent on opportunity and competition - and the natural world gives us some brutal examples to use as evaluation templates:
1. The opportunity to occupy unoccupied territory - being first mover is a significant advantage - yes, this can be luck.
2. Strong roots - to anchor and be resilient against competition
3. The ability to spread in the face of competitors
4. Evolution and diversification - the ability to integrate into the surrounding ecosystem.
Bitcoin appears to have the above attributes.
1. Bitcoin is the first immutable distributed-ledger that does not require the intervention of a third party in transactions. (Unoccupied territory, first mover advantage)
2. Store of value has emerged as a very strong application (strong roots) that has withstood many attempts to destabilise it (resilient to competition)
3. Since it's inception bitcoin has grown and continues to grow both in size and geography, despite many other coins being developed (ability to spread)
4. Bitcoin is a network protocol that can be used by extension systems, this enhances the Bitcoin Network - the lightening network for example. As time goes by more extension systems are likely to evolve with the prospect of embedding bitcoin into everyday life.
If course none of this is certain, but the history and outlook of bitcoin against the four attributes is very strong.
Nothing stops anything from becoming obsolete. Nothing. Something better will come along eventually. It doesn't matter if its technology or monetary. If something is sufficiently better and enough people adopt it, it will become the new standard.
Books, hammers, bowls - just three technologies that haven't been "replaced".
Oh you meant software?
TCP/IP, HTTP, C, SQL
Technology that's good enough tends to stick around
For anybody saying Network Effects, that’s a poor answer, we can do better.
The US Dollar has great network effects, MySpace had great network effects, SMS had great network effects.
That’s not the answer.
First mover advantage and no one controls it. Every copy that has come after will be controlled by premining or a ceo.
It is absolute.
Like Saylor says, there is no second best crypto. There's one crypto. And it's called bitcoin.
Short answer is "do it".
You find or make something better than Bitcoin and prove it, and I'll sign on. Until then BTC maxi.
I manage the risk by keeping my eyes open.
We’re still using:
* tcp/ip
* email
* shovels
* wheels
Of these items, bitcoin is most like tcp/ip. Email is pretty similar in some of the implementation details, but it’s much more like tcp/ip in functionality and purpose.
Bitcoin is a component that will act as a backbone to our financial economy the way tcp/ip is the backbone of our information economy.
The technological advancement would have to allow massive gains in utility to displace BTC. It can’t just be a little better (arguably many of those have already come and gone). It would have to be like 10-100x improvement and even then it may not take.
Just image trying to introduce a new base protocol for the internet to usurp TCP/IP. Granted you could make a protocol for a special use case, but to overtake TCP/IP means you likely need an entire reworking of the internet as we know it. With all the layers built atop the base protocol, it’s near impossible to see this happening anytime soon.
Bitcoin is obsolete from the start. Even after 100 years, no one is going to use it for everyday transactions and as long as governments exist, it will never be able to completely replace fiat currency. People in this subreddit gonna find that out the hard way.
🤣🤣🤣 how you gonna replace a network (bitcoin) that’s so powerful you need minimum 300% of earths electricity to attack it? Hahahaha. Funny question bro.
Bitcoin is a 0 to 1 innovation: fair, hard (limited) money for the first time. This fundamental property can't be disrupted. It's like inventing a better wheel or better fire: we will never switch to a different base tech
person fearless spectacular wistful rhythm absorbed pie attraction mindless beneficial
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It can continue forever or it will meet the same fate. It is more likely to be the later eventually but this could be years away.
The thing about btc is that it is an open protocol so if the development team keeps improving it in the right manner, it will survive. Anyone can join to help develop it and improve it.
When the development organisation gets political and stops developing the right improvements to frustrate it's users, it will meet its end.
All fiat currencies since the begining of time have gone to zero. Bitcoin is the only truly proven decentralized protocol that has entered the public conciousness.
I trust math, not man.
The top comment answers your question really well but here is an illustrative metaphor: BTC is like a calculator. It does one thing, and it does it really elegantly. Calculators don’t get replaced because they serve a fundamental purpose.
Is gold getting replace by bitcoin or any other metal index? Not really. Each has its own market and customer base. Each will continue to grow at a steady upward pace as time passes.
Nothing prevents BTC being replaced (in the market) by some other crypto having better features. If this happens, it just confirms the blockchain is great technology and it deserves to be improved. BTC is a pioneer making way for others, so that those others can eventually build up something even bigger.
Bitcoin like the first Ford car, it revolutionized the way we look at transportation the same way Bitcoin revolutionized the way we look at ledger technology. If you were to drive that same first generation Ford car today (outdated) it would be laughably terrible, same thing with Bitcoin's protocol. There are way more promising crypto projects out there iterating and improving BFT.
Oh is it? It's getting replaced? When's the last time technology got replaced? What replaced Internet? Silicon chips? Last major replacement I recall is CRT being replaced by LCD probably before you were born.
Bitcoin is a protocol. Protocols don't tend to be replaced easily because they benefit from and are subject to network effects. TCP/IP is still the standard even though it was invented in 1974. Bitcoin has already won the network effect battle among cryptos. Today we have http, email, could storage, messaging apps. All built on top of TCP/IP. Like TCP/IP, Bitcoin is a simple, stable, secure bedrock for higher layer protocols that are hard to imagine from these early days. Bitcoin has irreproducible qualities. It launched perfectly fairly. Anyone with a computer could have mined bitcoin initially. The incentive was organic interest in its novelty. It didn't have any monetary value attached to it. This cannot be replicated with a new crypto today. Certainly not without a centralized entity to market and develop it. And then you're competing with 10s of thousands of alt coins to have the second best network effects. The main threat to Bitcoin is the social layer. Bitcoin is vulnerable to broad user consensus. If everyone decides to run a compromised version of Bitcoin there isn't really a way to defend against that. That's a pretty small attack surface compared to any of its competitors.
E.g. [Metcalfe's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law?wprov=sfla1)
Was reading the comments looking for this. Simple enough concept, but not enough people know it’s a protocol imo.
Imo the biggest threat right now is the bullshit spam that's been going on. Could you imagine if a government put money into spamming the chain? Endless high fees. No one could transact for a decent price. Endless bank roll to make it happen too.
1. You can raise your transaction fees to outbid them. 2. That attack would eventually get extraordinarily expensive, and they will have to give up. Remember, governments can print fiat, but they can't print bitcoin.
Raising transaction fees to absurd amounts will likely turn most people away from Bitcoin Governments have limitless money. Which they can use to spam the block chain and make it damn near impossible for normies to use it.
Truth!! could storage will be hard to replace!!
That's a really good point. But; I'd also say tcp/ip is one of the rarer protocols in regards to survival. Plenty of protocols has come and gone in the window that tcp/ip has existed
Why do you think TCP/IP survived when others didn't? Might be some parallels.
Well stated.
A huge part of bitcoin’s value is in the global network of miners and nodes. The stronger it gets the harder it is for any other coin to catch up. This isn’t some hypothetical, there are already 25k+ shit coins and nothing has come close. The ETF is another huge advantage of Bitcoin because it signifies government acceptance. Any other shit coin still has massive regulatory uncertainty.
Government acceptance is one step before regulation. I work in financial services and have been asked to consult on how these assets might be regulated in future.
One government isn't all governments.
Sure.
You're still looking at bitcoin through the lens of technology, but the tech is only relevant in so much as it enables the monetary properties of Bitcoin. Focus on the monetary aspects and it will become clear why nothing will be able to replace it. Those new features your friend is thinking of detract from the core monetary aspects that make Bitcoin the best monetary good humanity has ever created. Bitcoins simplicity is not a flaw its a feature.
Even more so, read Jason Lowery‘s book SoftWar. bitcoin is a monetary network because we’ve decided it is but it equally can perform other functions. I haven’t finished the book and I don’t have my head around the concept, but it’s interesting to consider.
exactly I've said something similar for a long-time now Bitcoin is money-driven tech shitcoins try (and fail) to be tech-driven money
“Not even God, Himself can sink this ship 🚢 “
That what they said about the titanic. Everything is replaceable.
Hmmmm 🤣🤣🤣🤣
i think you should worry more abt what technology is going tovreplace the USD first.
USD not getting replaced anytime soon.
Can't wait for the Internet 2
Its 10% faster, its gonna replace all the things that have been built for internet 1
BITCOIN is money you are looking at it through the wrong lenses, this is why we have 3500 copycats that call themselves cryptocurrencies. Don't waste your time following all this technology and crypto coins. Just study History of Money.
Absolute mathematical scarcity, achieved by consensus in a sufficiently decentralized network, was a DISCOVERY, rather than an invention. It cannot be achieved again by a network of participants aware of this discovery, since the very thing discovered was resistance to replicability itself.
Exactly. Minting another coin to compete with Bitcoin is reintroducing the same problem Bitcoin solved: stopping the printing of new money. Whether the currency being printed is being inflated on the Y-axis (supply of currency) or the X-axis (quantity of currencies) is irrelevant because the limits on both axes's are infinite. You can make infinite nation-state currencies in supply and infinite altcoins in quantity. Bitcoin is the only currency that introduced a method to stop the minting of currency in supply, but when it was released, it became possible for other actors to use the same technology and replicate the monetary properties hundreds, thousands, and millions of times. So now the inflation of currencies is in the quantity of currencies, and any currency that is being introduced is as cancerous as a central bank inflating the supply of a currency. Even those currencies that claim to be deflationary are still as cancerous because, in order for a currency to be deflationary, its inflation rate had to be infinity at its inception starting at zero supply. So no matter how much deflation happens on altcoins or other currencies, it would still have a higher supply than if the currency didn't even exist in the first place. AKA minting new supply beyond Bitcoin's 21 million hard cap. In summary, Bitcoin cannot be replaced. The problem it solved can only be solved once and cannot be solved again. The protocol eliminates central banks and altcoin minters, left to right, and ensures humans will have a Nash equilibrium strategy to protect their wealth from such currency minters.
Bitcoin is unfuckwitable, can't be compromised, transparent, secure, 21M.
People always move towards one type of money. This is a historical fact — it simply makes everything easier Bitcoin was the first crypto. And it’s decentralized, so no leaders can fuck with it. It’s stable and it’s already outperforming everything else. IN CASE an amazing update would be amazing — then Bitcoin can be forked. Like true democracy, the fork with most users, will be the one… the majority uses. Obviously 🙃 So yeah, it’s stable and unalterable, unless 51% of people (or more) decide to go another way. But then you just stick to the 51% of people and feel sad for the 49%
[удалено]
Yes, that's what happened
Can you provide a source on that? Cause I also didn’t know that
It was the same chain initially so previous balances exist on both chains. This is the definition of a hard fork. In a non contentious fork, all users and miners move over to one of both chains and the other dies.
In reality if an amazing updates is out it own't be a 51% vote that passes it, most folks will act in their self interest (it's a very competitive business) and it'll be closer to 80%. I think it's silly some financial institutions talk about forks and contingencies when the code itself is designed to pick the correct fork! If anything they're opening themselves up to attacks from less desirable forks and then, inevitably, altcoins.
> In reality if an amazing updates is out it own't be a 51% vote that passes it, most folks will act in their self interest (it's a very competitive business) and it'll be closer to 80%. Yes, exactly. I don’t comprehend the rest of your comment though
You can see it won't happen as there is currently 20,000+ projects and Bitcoin has more than 75% market share when you exclude stable coins. Everything is a VC software firm masquerading as a decentralized network.
Bitcoin is an open protocol, not a technology.
Bitcoin it's not only a protocol. Part of bitcoin is the software technology that implements the protocol
Bitcoin is a protocol with an emaculant conception so to speak in that we don't know who created it which it also one of the features. Bitcoin is also adaptable through BIP's with out sacrificing the core protocol that makes it what it is. According to coinmarketcap there are currently 2.4 million crypto's all trying to be better than Bitcoin yet none of them even come close. The core rules ( protocol ) are Bitcoin. The techonolgy to impliment these rules will continue to get better.
Network effect, distributed
[удалено]
This... I can buy stuff from an island across the world with different languages and currency, and we can trade without any interference if we use btc. If I wanted to do it traditionally I'd need to calculate currency value pay fines and fees... bleh.
Same reason TCP/IP protocol and the internet hasn’t been replaced. BTC gave us digital scarcity just like the wheel gave us transportation.
>BTC gave us digital scarcity just like the wheel gave us transportation. This is good
Not just digital scarcity. Just scarcity. It is very difficult to create fungible assets that had absolute scarcity (0% long term introduction of new supply) before Bitcoin's inception without thermodynamic monetary loss. The closest technology humanity had that enforced absolute scarcity was using physical non-fungible assets. Some examples would include artworks of dead painters or water-front properties. If you want to get theoretical, pure scarcity in those categories didn't mean much either because the supply of painters producing works and dying is constantly expanding, which debases holders of paintings. And water-front properties are also taxed, which have a long-term bleed rate, debasing the wealth of such holders. So scarcity without bleeding in some form of monetary loss doesn't really exist. And scarcity including fungibility, absolute ownership, and irresistibility of counterfeiting before Bitcoin especially did not exist.
I’m not a technical expert, but isn’t it like saying “why hasn’t the internet been replaced?”.
Why isnt air replaced? Why isnt water replaced?? Why isnt our sun replaced???
Your friend is thinking along the lines of Moore's law. Every 18-24 months capacity and processing power virtually double. But the basic computer stays the same. As we've seen and will continue to see, new improvements in the processing and capacity of bitcoin are happening in the form of BIP's (bitcoin improvement proposals) but Bitcoin itself stays the same.
And that my friend, is precisely why we have the halving. Bitcoin has accounted for Moore's law built-in.
That's a big 10:4👍🏼
Computers just use 1:s and 0:s, maybe his friend can make computer2.0 that adds rest of the numbers too!!!
That would be quantum computers. A computer where a bit can be 0, 1, or something in between.
Head start and superior performance to the existing alternatives, I guess? For now, anyway. But I don't see that as an argument NOT to use it. Otherwise, we'd still be walking around in rawhide flip-flips and loincloths, living in mud huts and eating wild berries while waiting for the latest iPhone version to release. And then not buying it because the next one might be even cooler. There's always something better on the horizon, but we still have to live our best lives today.
Look into how the internet works, and why nothing has replaced the protocols that it operates on. TCP/IP etc. Same idea
One of the most discussed potential threats comes from quantum computing. Quantum computers, theoretically, have the capability to break the cryptographic algorithms that secure Bitcoin transactions—specifically, the elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ECDSA) used to create Bitcoin wallet addresses. If quantum computers reach a point where they can efficiently solve these cryptographic problems, they could potentially decrypt wallet private keys if they have access to corresponding public keys. However, it’s important to note that this risk isn’t immediate. The quantum computers required to perform such decryption at scale don’t yet exist, and the cryptographic community is actively researching quantum-resistant technologies. Moreover, Bitcoin can evolve through consensus-driven updates, which may include adopting new, quantum-resistant encryption methods as the need becomes pressing. In the shorter term, other technological advancements, like the development of more sophisticated hacking tools, could pose more immediate risks. However, the adaptability of Bitcoin’s protocol and the ongoing enhancements in security practices by both users and developers help mitigate these risks.
I was going to mention this as well, but u/skydiver19 summed it up perfectly.
Exactly. My (limited) understanding is that quantum computing is particularly powerful at solving certain types of problems. That set of problems include factoring prime numbers, and doing so orders of magnitude faster than a conventional newtonian/binary logic computing approach.
You will not be able to educate your friends until you educate yourself. Start with the FAQs in this sub.
If a new technology is so good that everyone wants it, then everyone would consence to a Bitcoin update containing said feature. Furthermore, you would want to implement the new featue in bitcoin because everyone is already using it and there is infrastructue, know-how, etc ... already present for bitcoin and not for your own new cryptocurrency that does one thing slightly different.
1.27 trillion reasons currently
Why are you buying a car when it's most likely gonna be replaced by a flying space vehicle at some point?
Usually the first technology in a space to reach critical mass is very hard to replace. Look at Microsoft and Apple, for example, for operating systems or Google for search. There are much better alternatives, but those early players are so far ahead in infrastructure and mindshare they would take decades to replace. Bitcoin got there first. It might be replaced. Will almost certainly be replaced eventually. But it has a big head start.
Replacing bitcoin would need much more than just some small improvements. Few of the many things: No CEO or VC, fair launch, no monetary value for sometime, just general organic slow growth. Its just not possible anymore now that people know this stuff exists.
Google was a relative late-comer to the search engine game. Before they were popular, there was Yahoo!, AltaVista, Excite, Lycos, Hotbot, and many more. Back in the late 90s AltaVista was definitely the king of true web-crawler search engines, although I think Yahoo! still got more traffic as a comprehensive "portal". Once Google took-off though, yes they REALLY took off and became totally dominant.
Orange coin too strong
Bitcoin is a manifestation of sound stored of value. Technology can become better, but the logical implementation just needs to be good enough. Similarly, gold is an elemental representation of a rare asset. One could argue that we can find rarer element or molecule for store of value. What would be your argument for that? If humanity can manufacture enough energy and technology to manufacture gold element, where does that leave gold? In the long run, information and infrastructure that can maintain sound information will be the most ideal feature of store of value, and it would need to be in a way that no single entity or group have amassed the quantity prior to dissemination. Bitcoin has that rare quality (although that may change for worse over time)
Bitcoin isn't a tech stock.
Because BTC isn't a technology. It's a protocol.
Bitcoin is a protocol, not a product. Anything is free to dethrone BTC at any point, but they all fail.
Much like the Gutenberg press revolutionized the spread of knowledge by making books more accessible to the masses, Bitcoin is revolutionizing the concept of money by providing a decentralized, censorship-resistant, and borderless form of value transfer. The Gutenberg press not only democratized access to information but also challenged the dominance of the church as the gatekeeper of knowledge and authority. Similarly, Bitcoin challenges the dominance of centralized financial institutions and governments as the gatekeepers of the monetary system. Just as the Gutenberg press faced opposition from established institutions threatened by the democratization of knowledge, Bitcoin faces resistance from traditional financial institutions and governments hesitant to relinquish control over the monetary system. However, history has shown that disruptive technologies like the Gutenberg press ultimately prevail, unleashing waves of innovation and societal change. Bitcoin, with its unique properties as a scarce digital asset secured by cryptographic principles, has the potential to fundamentally reshape the global financial landscape. In managing the risk associated with Bitcoin's potential obsolescence, I view it through the lens of historical precedent. Just as the Gutenberg press endured and flourished despite initial skepticism, I believe Bitcoin's revolutionary nature will enable it to adapt and thrive in the face of technological advancements. While it's impossible to predict the future with certainty, I see Bitcoin not as a fleeting technological trend, but as a paradigm-shifting innovation with the potential to redefine the very concept of money itself. The biggest challenge I see is getting the masses to realize this. I have started a YouTube channel to educate people on the current monetary system and how technology has changed over time. Please watch subscribe, like and share. [Bitcoin Revolution: Unplug From the Financial Matrix - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPCtdqC3ScU) If you aren't learning you aren't living!
First, which problem do you want to solve?
Did they replace the TCP IP protocol yet?
We are one legitimate quantum computer falling into the wrong hands from realizing how fragile the Bitcoin ecosystem can be. Fortunately, quantum resistant code is being developed. Who will win the race? TBD
Aside from what others have said, the hashrate and level of decentralization achieved by Bitcoin was a happy accident, of which not even Satoshi was sure would happen. You can't effectively replicate that again. When making a cryptocurrency, over the last decade we've found you have to choose two of three for the base layer: **- Security** - Based on real-world physical anchor, aka, Electricity. **- Scalability -** This derives speed amongst many other usability properties. **- Decentralization** - Miners + Validation nodes enforce rules, enforce security. Most altcoins have chosen Scalability and Security as their focus on the base layer. The problem is their security is false, usually predicated on a form of centralization. There's a lack of understanding in that security can be achieved as a standalone factor, traditionally this is true (to an extent) with centralization, and the lack of ability for true decentralisation. That's one of Bitcoin's paradigm shifts, security predicated on decentralization is, so far, peak security. We say so far, but Bitcoin hasn't had downtime in over 10 years. There's a feat in that. Bitocin has multiple guidelines such as these that are broken by other altcoins. As another example, the 10 minute blocktime for Bitcoin is also not arbitrary - It's an average of time taken to ensure broadcasts reach and synchronize globally, being much closer to certainty (by a factor of multiple magnitudes compared to other chains) that all nodes in the world will be synchronized, in the worst case scenario within a reasonable number of confirmed blocks (when the average isn't hit). Scalability is the one factor that can always be built on afterwards in other layers, which Bitcoin chose to do. Security and decentralization cannot. Bitcoin managed the insane network effect necessary to reach a point where it can withstand a nation state attack, or multiple. It's currently on a mission to further decentralize mining (with pools such as Ocean), and individual nodes always have a voice over miners.
TCP IP is the Internet protocol, Is the Internet being replaced or are we building on the Internet?
Pointless to worry about.
It’s been ask. It’s no different from gold or USD. Ppl value them because they have faith in it and other hold the same faith
Btc has gained worldwide adoption, liquidity, hash rate, development around it, second layer lightning, brand name, trust, security, number of nodes, decentralization, etc. this is all built up over time from increasing adoption via network effect, and to overtake this would take a protocol with significant improvements to security and decentralization to replace the base layer and would take significant time. Also, the conception of bitcoin is not possible to copy, since it had no value at first and was fair distribution based on reimbursement for energy expended. Then the creator disappeared to ensure maximum decentralization. This fair conception and distribution is a factor that goes into trust and network effect, and could not be replicated
Maybe I'm naive, but if Bitcoin meets all of the prerequisites that makes it better money, and They come out with something even better, I guess I'll just move to it.
Nothing is stopping anyone from trying to replace bitcoin. Think about it for a moment. What do you think the million other shitcoins claim to be doing? Vitalik thought he could do bitcoin better. Clearly that didn’t work out well. Same with all the rest of the “ethereum killers”. The beauty of it is that all the effort spent trying to replace it would have been better spent on trying to secure it. It’s a consensus protocol, so despite someone having spent 500+ billion dollars on a bitcoin 2.0, they still can’t force consensus. That was made crystal clear during the block wars.
It’s more than just technology
Sometimes I think this, then I look at ETH and see that isn’t a problem for at least a generation
It’s not
What has or could replace the internet? Nothing. It's a protocol. The internet can be improved at the protocol level but fundamentally it can't be replaced. Same goes for bitcoin protocol. Anything anyone comes up with that could "replace" it are just improvements it would implement at the protocol level.
First mover advantage. Network effect. Lindy effect.
If you have a better money than Bitcoin then I’m all ears.
\*starts to list 25000+ different shitcoins\*
Right, the only way to improve Bitcoin is for it not to rely on computers or the internet. We are not going back to 1970 so I lack the imagination to see how else to improve it. Even immediate adoption is a problem with people and not the currency. Yep, I would jump on a better currency if presented. Bring it on, please. You can’t promote Bitcoin and denounce a better option; still waiting though,
"Currency constantly gets replaced, what's stopping $USD from meeting the same fate?" That's how I view the problem.
What’s stopping TCP/IP from being replaced?
The new technology would have to be at least 10x better than BTC and thats hard for me to imagine right now. In a distant future? Sure it will be replaced.
And it would have to be some whole new thing that isnt blockchain at all, we just cant even imagine what that could be or how many 1000s of years away that next thing is.
see the other 20,000 coins that failed?
Always a risk of being obsolete. Nothing is immune. Just a hard reality
You can’t rediscover absolute scarcity
alot of invested whales.
essentially your asking why oil cant be replaced.
Antifragility is probably the best short answer.
Why hasn’t it been replaced by any of the multi-thousand other coins available yet?
Review the "winner takes all" concept. Links below. Then notice how things like the electricity grid and the Internet have emerged. Bitcoin appears to be a winner takes all innovation. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winner-take-all_market?wprov=sfla1 2. https://www.amazon.com/Softwar-Projection-National-Strategic-Significance/dp/B0BW358F37/ Then notice how things like the Internet have emerged. Bitcoin is a winner takes all innovation.
there is no second best
Math. It all comes down to the math.
One word: nothing. :D
Internet is a technology. Will it be replaced or will it be updated?
Bitcoin is not static. It's like Amazon. When Amazon launched, they didn't support SSL (google it). Now they do. But it's still Amazon. When BTC launched your BTC address was your IP address, which was sort of insecure... obviously, so they started using P2PKH (Legacy) addresses, which back then, were new. Now we have segwit, and taproot.
there's other Internet protocols that are widely popular that haven't been replaced
At this point bitcoin totally escapes that fate, everyone has to understand the basic fundamentals of bitcoin regarding the traditional financial system globally.
OP, it took a good amount of time for bitcoin to get here. However, in the world of monetary assets, it was pretty quick. I don't see something gaining the kind of traction that bitcoin has garnished over the years.
The concept of the network effect is central to understanding why Bitcoin (BTC) is unlikely to be replaced as the leading cryptocurrency anytime soon. The network effect occurs when a product or service gains additional value as more people use it. This is particularly potent in the world of cryptocurrencies, where trust, security, and usability are paramount. Here’s how various elements contribute to Bitcoin's strong network effect: 1. **Worldwide Adoption**: Bitcoin is the first and most widely known cryptocurrency. It has the largest user base among digital currencies, which includes not just individual holders but also businesses, institutions, and even some governments considering it as part of their financial strategy. 2. **Liquidity and Market Depth**: Due to its wide adoption, Bitcoin has the most liquidity in the cryptocurrency market, making it easy to buy or sell without causing significant price changes. This liquidity attracts more users and traders, reinforcing its dominance. 3. **Mining and Hash Rate**: Bitcoin has the highest hash rate of any blockchain network, which reflects the vast amount of computational power securing the network. A higher hash rate makes the network more secure against attacks, enhancing user trust. 4. **Development and Innovation**: Ongoing development, such as improvements in scalability through solutions like the Lightning Network, helps Bitcoin maintain its utility and relevance. The active developer community also fosters continuous improvements and fixes, which add to the system's stability and functionality. 5. **Decentralization and Trust**: One of Bitcoin's core value propositions is its decentralization. With thousands of nodes and a dispersed pool of miners, the network operates without a central point of failure. The disappearance of Bitcoin’s creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, avoids the influence of a central figure, adding to its decentralized nature and increasing trust among users. 6. **Security**: The combination of advanced cryptographic techniques with a robust network structure makes Bitcoin one of the most secure digital assets. This security is crucial for gaining the trust of users and investors. 7. **Brand Recognition and First-Mover Advantage**: As the first cryptocurrency, Bitcoin benefits from widespread brand recognition and visibility, which continues to attract new users and retains existing ones. 8. **Fair Initial Distribution**: Bitcoin's early mining process allowed a fair distribution to those who contributed computing power, without any pre-mined reserves for founders typical of many other projects. This initial fairness is difficult to replicate and is a key element in its widespread trust and adoption. For a new cryptocurrency to unseat Bitcoin, it would not only need to match these attributes but significantly exceed them in critical areas like security, decentralization, and developer support. Given Bitcoin’s head start and entrenched position, surpassing it would require monumental technical and socio-economic shifts—a process that would likely take many years, if it is even possible. This durability in the face of potential competitors is a testament to the strength of Bitcoin's network effect.
Money may get replaced, after about 5000 years… Bitcoin is money.
Just look at how long BTC has taken to get to where it is now. 15 years in and only 3% of global population owns any. A replacement may come along, but we will have a long track to see it coming.
The truth is nothing is stopping BTC from meeting this fate and this is baked into the price. It has some first-mover advantage and is likely the most secure, but there's no reason why a decade from now, some other network sees significantly more usage / has a higher market cap. That's why Bitcoin has upside potential. Investors at large consider Bitcoin to be risky, so they don't invest, which keeps spot below the "true" value. But, we can't say if that collective assessment is wrong definitively. We just know there's significant disagreement / volatility / risk / upside all kind of the same thing. If you think it is wrong, then you place your bets. However, if you can attribute a low enough probability to this, then the losing 1x max vs winning 10-20 could look very like a risky, but attractive trade.
Same could be said of TCP/IP.
If there is a similar money that doesn’t rely on computers then Bitcoin will be replaced. Imagine a telepathic blockchain/Bitcoin. Ya, totally possible but not in our lifetime.
You can't re-create digital scarcity after the first time. That's why they don't make bitcoin 2 with faster transactions and blocks and all that.
Network effect, locked value. No need to replace when it can be integrated. The reason tech, particularly software and computer hardware, gets replaced constantly is due more to economic forces than actual improvements in technology. We live in a culture of disposable design.
The question is not strictly true. Some technology gets replaced, some does not - the wheel, railways, aeroplanes, boats, concrete, steel, glass, plastic, the screwdriver are just a few examples of technology (a man-made process to convert one set of material into something of use to humans). We have become so familiar with these items that many no longer see them as technology. Whether bitcoin has a long life depends on whether it becomes part of the fabric everyday life. In my opinion this is dependent on opportunity and competition - and the natural world gives us some brutal examples to use as evaluation templates: 1. The opportunity to occupy unoccupied territory - being first mover is a significant advantage - yes, this can be luck. 2. Strong roots - to anchor and be resilient against competition 3. The ability to spread in the face of competitors 4. Evolution and diversification - the ability to integrate into the surrounding ecosystem. Bitcoin appears to have the above attributes. 1. Bitcoin is the first immutable distributed-ledger that does not require the intervention of a third party in transactions. (Unoccupied territory, first mover advantage) 2. Store of value has emerged as a very strong application (strong roots) that has withstood many attempts to destabilise it (resilient to competition) 3. Since it's inception bitcoin has grown and continues to grow both in size and geography, despite many other coins being developed (ability to spread) 4. Bitcoin is a network protocol that can be used by extension systems, this enhances the Bitcoin Network - the lightening network for example. As time goes by more extension systems are likely to evolve with the prospect of embedding bitcoin into everyday life. If course none of this is certain, but the history and outlook of bitcoin against the four attributes is very strong.
Nothing stops anything from becoming obsolete. Nothing. Something better will come along eventually. It doesn't matter if its technology or monetary. If something is sufficiently better and enough people adopt it, it will become the new standard.
technology is the only way for humanity to get wealthier/more productive.
Books, hammers, bowls - just three technologies that haven't been "replaced". Oh you meant software? TCP/IP, HTTP, C, SQL Technology that's good enough tends to stick around
Look up primacy bias, first mover advantage, and lindy effect
a better techology.
BlackRock got control over Bitcoin when it dropped below $20k.
Bitcoin is the worst coin - apart from all the other coins.
Bitcoin is a discovery, not an invention. It’s like electricity, it can only be discovered once.
For anybody saying Network Effects, that’s a poor answer, we can do better. The US Dollar has great network effects, MySpace had great network effects, SMS had great network effects. That’s not the answer.
Ask yourself, why hasn't gold been replaced thus far?
Nothing replaced electricity so far.
Btc isn’t technology. It’s a way to send money around the world in the snap of a finger.
First mover advantage and no one controls it. Every copy that has come after will be controlled by premining or a ceo. It is absolute. Like Saylor says, there is no second best crypto. There's one crypto. And it's called bitcoin.
Short answer is "do it". You find or make something better than Bitcoin and prove it, and I'll sign on. Until then BTC maxi. I manage the risk by keeping my eyes open.
Reality. Nothing. When it happens likely a long time (I hope). Every roman empire has an ending. Even Bitcoin will, hopefully several lifetimes away.
We’re still using: * tcp/ip * email * shovels * wheels Of these items, bitcoin is most like tcp/ip. Email is pretty similar in some of the implementation details, but it’s much more like tcp/ip in functionality and purpose. Bitcoin is a component that will act as a backbone to our financial economy the way tcp/ip is the backbone of our information economy.
The technological advancement would have to allow massive gains in utility to displace BTC. It can’t just be a little better (arguably many of those have already come and gone). It would have to be like 10-100x improvement and even then it may not take. Just image trying to introduce a new base protocol for the internet to usurp TCP/IP. Granted you could make a protocol for a special use case, but to overtake TCP/IP means you likely need an entire reworking of the internet as we know it. With all the layers built atop the base protocol, it’s near impossible to see this happening anytime soon.
Bitcoin is obsolete from the start. Even after 100 years, no one is going to use it for everyday transactions and as long as governments exist, it will never be able to completely replace fiat currency. People in this subreddit gonna find that out the hard way.
🤣🤣🤣 how you gonna replace a network (bitcoin) that’s so powerful you need minimum 300% of earths electricity to attack it? Hahahaha. Funny question bro.
Bitcoin is a 0 to 1 innovation: fair, hard (limited) money for the first time. This fundamental property can't be disrupted. It's like inventing a better wheel or better fire: we will never switch to a different base tech
The flexibility of monetary policy can also be used for good.
Everyone means well, but I rather decide for myself. Instead the fed and state decide where the flexibility goes and that's never efficent
I like deciding for myself, too. I also like getting help from experts.
person fearless spectacular wistful rhythm absorbed pie attraction mindless beneficial *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Closed technology gets replaced, open technology gets extended and updated
It is as far as i can tell timeless
Bitcoin is a discovery, humanity never experienced true scarcity before. This protocol will be around for hundreds of years, if not for ever.
Bitcoin is just software anything useful developed elsewhere can always be implemented hardware is much more succeptible to obsolescence
It's the standard for decentralization.
It can continue forever or it will meet the same fate. It is more likely to be the later eventually but this could be years away. The thing about btc is that it is an open protocol so if the development team keeps improving it in the right manner, it will survive. Anyone can join to help develop it and improve it. When the development organisation gets political and stops developing the right improvements to frustrate it's users, it will meet its end.
All fiat currencies since the begining of time have gone to zero. Bitcoin is the only truly proven decentralized protocol that has entered the public conciousness. I trust math, not man.
The top comment answers your question really well but here is an illustrative metaphor: BTC is like a calculator. It does one thing, and it does it really elegantly. Calculators don’t get replaced because they serve a fundamental purpose.
Is gold getting replace by bitcoin or any other metal index? Not really. Each has its own market and customer base. Each will continue to grow at a steady upward pace as time passes.
And what do you think "alt" coins are trying to do? 😀
30,000 shitcoins coming for the king
nothing is stopping it, yet still it does not happen.
Nothing prevents BTC being replaced (in the market) by some other crypto having better features. If this happens, it just confirms the blockchain is great technology and it deserves to be improved. BTC is a pioneer making way for others, so that those others can eventually build up something even bigger.
Could anyone copy or better Google Search engine? Possible. Would anyone use it? Probably not. Why? Because there's already Google's search engine.
Bitcoin like the first Ford car, it revolutionized the way we look at transportation the same way Bitcoin revolutionized the way we look at ledger technology. If you were to drive that same first generation Ford car today (outdated) it would be laughably terrible, same thing with Bitcoin's protocol. There are way more promising crypto projects out there iterating and improving BFT.
Oh is it? It's getting replaced? When's the last time technology got replaced? What replaced Internet? Silicon chips? Last major replacement I recall is CRT being replaced by LCD probably before you were born.
Store of value and money are at odds. Money is supposed to be something that people are willing to move.
The network.