When I was a kid, I had a typewriter. Was even still possible to buy ink ribbons for it in a local stationary store, not that I could afford them on pocket money, but I've not seen ink ribbons in a stationary store since the early 90s.
Despite that, typewriters are still around: https://www.amazon.com/Royal-79101t-Classic-Manual-Typewrite...
Expand to other solar system and it will get worse still.
If you're using the bitcoin consensus approach in an interplanetary era, you quickly end up with using the full output of Dyson swarm just to stop someone else doing the same, not for any real gain over "I trust you to keep this ledger correct because we all know what 'accountants' and 'lawsuits' are".
If we don't have lawsuits, there's no process by which someone's failure to have an accountant could be held against them. If you don't have something accountant-shaped that can examine the real world, then you have no way to audit that your debit of 100 Martian Pesos was balanced with a credit of 100 traditional Martian didgeridoos, no matter if the Martian Peso was a cryptocurrency, a fiat currency, or commodity money consisting of transmuted post-transuranic-island-of-stability-metal. If you don't care about that, you're probably only playing with money and assets anyway and are functionally post-scarcity.
We might be post-scarcity, annihilated, or post-apocalyptic in 100 years, but none of these three would likely keep Bitcoin, and only one JavaScript.
BTC might still be around but very much in the background in favor of newer ones.
Crypto is speech, not property.
I really don’t think you’d like where that can of worms leads.
It doesn’t even matter if you like cryptocurrencies or not; we all have a vested interest in being able to create p2p networks amongst the whole internet and send any kind of messages/frames within them that we wish.
Crypto*graphy* is speech.
To assert that crypto*currency* is not property is quite bizarre.
Practically speaking, they can’t be anything but speech.
So how can we have bank regulation, when everything that a bank does is just speech?
The answer is that the law is interested in the content of communications, and whether the messages are cryptographically peer-to-peer this-or-that is irrelevant. If your crypto messaging is about selling drugs or unregistered securities, it's not much of an excuse that you were doing it peer-to-peer.
Bitcoin network doesn't have a CEO. It is what it is and will always be that. Bitcoin network will not decide, at some point, to lend out your bitcoin at 100x leverage. There will never be a run on Bitcoin network because it always has the same amount of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin network is already "regulated" by the code.
Bitcoin regulations are merely governments trying to regain control they had with banks (they can get all the info they want about you, they can order banks to shutdown your account, like Canadian government did).
Bitcoin and derivatives are of little to use for people other than criminals and gamblers.
I wouldn't recommend it, except as a learning experience for how useless crypto is for personal travel usage.
Carrying hundreds of USD currency worked better and felt safer.
Did some successful exchanges from crypto to obtain cash in Argentina (useful to get discounted Blue Rate).
Certainly would be useful to get money safely to rellies in AR.
Conversational Spanish, so that wasn't a problem.
Definitely didn't feel that safe, although fortunately I was not robbed. I only had a few thousand worth of crypto.
I have absolutely no crypto now.