Sébastien Meunier is a financial services consultant with 15 years of experience in commercial innovation. He talks about fintech and is a veteran startup mentor.

Before entering speculation, let's start with the facts – bitcoin has been declared dead more than 200 times.

Despite the fact that the world's first cryptocurrency has worked with almost 100% availability (for nearly 10 years), it is still fashionable to predict its demise. Even the so-called smart people are known to spread something that I'll call "Bitcoin Disruption Syndrome". They continue to predict the disappearance of Bitcoin, even if they are mistaken every day.

But if we assume that these individuals possess a level of intelligence, the only explanation for failed predictions and emotional arguments is that they never take the time to study and understand how the system works.

In this way, I would like to help by listing all possible ways to destroy bitcoin.

Technically speaking, bitcoin will live as long as a handful of computers will run bitcoin software on a network. Only one extreme scenario would lead to annihilation. It is therefore likely that it will always be the best cryptocurrency in the years to come, unless the community is destroyed by greed or neglect.

Scenario 1: Armageddon

Probability (next 5 years): Near zero

Impact: Sudden death

If all sources of electricity, the internet and data communications were cut across the planet, bitcoin nodes could not contact each other. The system would be useless.

A temporary Internet shutdown around the world would certainly create confusion in the bitcoin community, but it is important to note that the system would (theoretically) start from the longest chain again.

Even if hardcore fans or museums continue to use their software forever, the bitcoin will never be shut down technically.

Scenario 2: Critical Bug

Probability (last 5 years): Low

Potential Impact: Sudden Insignificance

In this scenario, an update of bitcoin might contain a bug on the level of the DAO project (built on the ethereum blockchain), which puts the system's integrity at risk.

Even if the community agreed (which is not guaranteed) to repair the code, install the new version and reboot the system, it would certainly lead to a price crash and a fork. .

The bitcoin community is aware of the risk: any code changes are peer-reviewed and tested according to contribution guidelines. That being said, only NASA is capable of producing faultless software code.

Scenario 3: Forked to Inadequacy

Probability (next 5 years): Low

Potential Impact: Slowness relevant

Bitcoin can be forked several times if the community does not agree on the way forward, for technical reasons (or "because the money").

Bitcoin Cash sharing, which occurred last summer, was not harmful for bitcoin because it saw the network nodes and the hash power decrease. Theoretically, several divisions could occur in which this network was still fragmented and its power reduced.

If that happened, I believe that Bitcoin would lose its dominance, slowly sinking into insignificance. Again, it is the community's interest not to let this happen.

Scenario 4: Joint repression of the government

Probability (next 5 years): Medium to low

Potential impact: Sudden insignificance

Governments can not destroy bitcoin itself because of its decentralized nature. However, they can control and restrict its use in their jurisdiction.

For example, they can close bank accounts of cryptographic companies and prohibit the creation of all related companies. If only a handful of countries prohibit cryptocurrencies, the impact will be limited because companies will simply turn to more user-friendly jurisdictions.

This is exactly what happened after China banned its domestic order book exchanges last year. And even though the likelihood that one or more governments will take to bitcoin in the same way is almost certain, I think a global ban is almost impossible (imagine that the UN is coming through to such a consensus).

Moreover, bitcoin is already legal in Japan. If the United States, the EU, the United Kingdom and China jointly prohibit cryptocurrence, that would be very damaging.

However, it is more likely that they will regulate the cryptocurrency market to collect tax revenues while protecting individual investors.

Scenario 5: Major Incapacity

Probability (next 5 years): Medium to High

Potential Impact: Temporary Accident

This scenario could occur in different ways.

In the first, called a 51% attack, a malicious network actor could attempt to hack the protocol itself. It is theoretically possible, but its probability is very low.

From the inside, the 51% attackers would destroy their own source of profit. From the outside, this would require huge investments in mining equipment and energy, and again the profit source of the attacker would crush.

It is more likely that it is a hack on an application built on the protocol.

When Mount. Gox was hacked in 2014 (an example of this attack), he managed 70% of all bitcoin transactions. Today, there are many more exchanges in the world. If any of them were hacked and a large amount of bitcoin was stolen, the price would probably break down, but bitcoin would probably recover.

Recently, for example, 400 million dollars of NEM were stolen from the Coincheck Stock Exchange: the price of NEM only dropped by 15 to 20% and was recovered in a day.

Scenario 6: Crypto-coins "best"

Probability (next 5 years): Medium to low

Potential impact: Slow not important

Is it possible that a "better" currency replaces bitcoin? (By "better", I mean more profitable to operate and with lower transaction costs for users, all things being equal.)

Let's face it: it's more economics and less convenience. This cryptocurrency should be much "better" to overcome the network effect and brand equity that Bitcoin benefits today.

The fact that this has not happened yet is revealing. In addition, for governance and economic reasons (not a technical problem), a "universal" cryptocurrency supported by the UN should not take place within five years.

The economy could play another role: if the price of electricity increased significantly, mining could become unprofitable. Only large pools where electricity is relatively cheaper would stay.

This is a difficult cost-security compromise. Bitcoin should find a way to reduce the cost of security while maintaining the integrity of the registry.

Scenario 7: Fatigue of the Market

Probability (last 5 years): Bottom

Potential Impact: Slow Magnitude

If crypto startups do not provide tangible value in the real world, people could slowly start to lose confidence in cryptocurrencies and tokens. (Something that has probably happened during the bear market of 2015 and 2016).

In this case, the growth of the market could slow down and its value will eventually stabilize. The crypto-market would lose its attractiveness from the point of view of investment, causing a further decline and so on …

Personally, I believe that some crypto startups will create value in the real world. In any case, the crypto-market is still nascent and we have time until it becomes boring. As history has shown too, the market is still able to bounce back.

Meteor Shower via Shutterstock

Leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk strives to offer an open platform for dialogue and discussion on all blockchain topics by encouraging contributing articles. As such, the opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of CoinDesk.

For more details on how to submit an article of opinion or analysis, check out our Editorial Guide or email news@coindesk.com.