When global computing power collapses, and mining farms collectively go offline, only a few hundred mining machines buzzing in the corner remain, many will shout: “Bitcoin is finished!” But the truth is quite the opposite: this may be its purest moment.
Bitcoin's security has never been built on the illusion of “massive computing power,” but rather stems from the delicate balance of economic incentives and decentralized consensus. Even if only a few dozen mining machines remain, as long as there are individuals willing to mine, the network can still produce blocks; as long as there are full nodes validating rules, the chain will not be chaotic. The difficulty adjustment mechanism will automatically “reduce dimensions to survive” within two weeks, allowing the system to breathe again. The real risk is not having less computing power, but rather having it overly centralized—that is what leaves gaps for a 51% attack.
But don't forget: attacking a network that is worth zero is meaningless. If it comes to only a few hundred mining machines left, it indicates that the market has shrunk drastically, and profits from double spending are far from covering costs. Rational attackers would not engage in such a losing business. More crucially, the Bitcoin community is not a passive collection of code that is beaten upon, but a living ecosystem that can respond quickly to threats—if necessary, hard forks and protocol upgrades are options.
Ultimately, the design philosophy of Bitcoin is to be anti-fragile, rather than pursuing never making mistakes. It is not afraid of recession, only afraid of people not believing. As long as there is one person plugging in the power and syncing nodes, it lives on. A few hundred mining machines are not the end of the world, but a stress test of the original intention of “decentralization”—and history has repeatedly proven, the more it is pushed to the corner, the harder it rebounds.
