Question 1

Who created Bitcoin and why does that matter?

Accepted Answer

Bitcoin was created by Satoshi Nakamoto. This name is a pseudonym that does not reveal the true identity of the person behind the project. The decision to remain anonymous was intentional from the moment Bitcoin was introduced to the world, and it increases the security, neutrality, and decentralization of the network and the asset.
Although no one knows who this person or group is, this mystery protects Bitcoin. Historically, governments and large institutions have always sought to resist anything that challenges their control over money. If Bitcoin had a public face, that person (or team) would be a single point of failure, that is, an easy target for legal attacks, coercion, or something even more serious. By remaining incognito, Satoshi Nakamoto eliminated this vulnerability, and thus, there is no leader to pursue.
In this way, the fact that there is no leader makes Bitcoin a truly neutral asset, since there is no central figure with an agenda, political inclinations, or reputation. On the contrary, Bitcoin’s trust and reputation come from the transparency of the technology, the global network of miners that ensure its security, and not from faith in its creator.
Furthermore, money should not need a central figure to function efficiently. Traditional fiat currencies, issued by central banks and backed by governments, can be inflated or confiscated. Bitcoin, by being decentralized, ensures that there is no single person or entity that has control over it. The fact that in 2010, Satoshi Nakamoto completely removed himself from the project was the final step toward true decentralization.
Today, the Bitcoin protocol evolves through community consensus, with thousands of active people around the world proposing improvements to the software. This distributed model has kept Bitcoin resilient for over 15 years and surviving all kinds of attacks.
Ultimately, Bitcoin seeks to return to humanity the power and sovereignty over its own money, and to remove the control of monetary policy from centers of power. Currently, Bitcoin is a verifiable and immutable digital record that processes billions of dollars every day without needing a central authority.

Question 2

Is Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme?

Accepted Answer

Critics who accuse Bitcoin of being a Ponzi scheme do not understand the nature or dynamics of the Bitcoin asset. A Ponzi scheme is defined by four main characteristics: guarantees of high returns, payment to early investors using money from new investors, absence of a real asset or business, and centralized control by a leader. Bitcoin meets none of these criteria.
Firstly, Bitcoin neither offers nor promises guaranteed returns. Its price is determined by the market, based on supply and demand, making Bitcoin a volatile asset. Investors can experience both gains and losses, unlike a Ponzi scheme where risks are typically concealed.
Furthermore, Bitcoin does not require constant adoption. The network has survived multiple bear markets, with sharp and significant price drops, and continued to operate without any issues. Bitcoin provides real value as an asset that allows its users to achieve full financial sovereignty and the right to transact. A Ponzi scheme has no value proposition.
Thirdly, the Bitcoin network is decentralized. There is no central authority recruiting new participants or manipulating the price. The code, white paper, and distribution can be verified by anyone and are entirely transparent.
Bitcoin is money. Like fiat currencies, its value stems from collective trust and the utility it offers as both a medium of exchange and a store of value. However, unlike fiat money, the supply of bitcoins cannot be inflated.
Participation in the Bitcoin network is transparent, decentralized, and entirely voluntary, which is fundamentally incompatible with a Ponzi scheme. With Bitcoin, no one promises returns, as is often advertised by promoters of such schemes.

Question 3

Can Bitcoin be compromised by hackers?

Accepted Answer

One of Bitcoin’s strengths lies in the robust security of its blockchain, whose decentralization and immutability are maintained by the proof-of-work mechanism. This consensus mechanism requires concentrating enormous computational and energy power to alter or include fraudulent transactions, which is practically impossible from both an energy and technical standpoint.
Although, in the past, cryptocurrency exchanges have been hacked, resulting in the theft of Bitcoin, these incidents occurred on centralized platforms and not in the Bitcoin protocol itself. The Bitcoin protocol has never been compromised, and its open-source code is continuously audited by a global community of developers who actively seek to identify vulnerabilities. This rigorous scrutiny enhances the resilience of the protocol, the network, and the asset.
Compared to traditional banks, which frequently suffer from cyberattacks and data breaches, Bitcoin’s decentralized nature eliminates single points of failure. No attack against the Bitcoin blockchain has ever been successful, which reinforces trust in the protocol.
Ultimately, the Bitcoin protocol, network, and asset are protected by a combination of mathematics, computational power, and aligned economic incentives among node runners, miners, and users, who contribute to the network’s stability and prosperity rather than attacking it.

Question 4

Is it possible to stop or shut down Bitcoin?

Accepted Answer

Bitcoin cannot be stopped or shut down due to its innovative and unique design. Unlike centralized systems vulnerable to single points of failure, Bitcoin operates on a global network composed of tens of thousands of computers spread across the world. These computers validate transactions, maintain the blockchain record, and ensure consensus without the need for oversight from a central authority.
To truly stop Bitcoin, a potential adversary would need to shut down or destroy all these computers distributed across every continent. Additionally, the proof-of-work consensus mechanism that secures the network makes attacks immensely costly from both an energy and monetary perspective.
In fact, throughout its history, Bitcoin has survived various regulatory attacks, such as in China, where miners simply relocated their operations to other countries.
On the other hand, stopping Bitcoin would also require confiscating the private keys, which control funds, from millions of individuals and businesses worldwide. A significant portion of these keys are stored offline in dedicated devices, making their seizure extremely difficult without violating the privacy and property rights of citizens on an unprecedented scale.
Ultimately, the essence of Bitcoin is free, open-source code. As long as there is someone, somewhere in the world, running the software and maintaining an intact copy of the blockchain, the network can persist, regenerate, and thrive. Bitcoin’s antifragile architecture ensures its indestructibility.

Question 5

Will quantum computers break Bitcoin?

Accepted Answer

The argument that quantum computers will break Bitcoin’s cryptography ignores the current state of quantum computing and overlooks the adaptability of Bitcoin’s protocol. Although, in theory, quantum computers could compromise the ECDSA signature algorithm, large-scale quantum computers capable of doing so do not yet exist and may still take many years to materialize. Building a quantum computer powerful enough to threaten Bitcoin’s security requires overcoming numerous technical challenges that scientists and engineers are still working to address.
Moreover, Bitcoin’s software is not static. It is an open-source, decentralized protocol that has been updated several times in the past and can adopt quantum-resistant cryptographic algorithms through a soft fork, which only requires consensus from node runners and, to some extent, miners.
The Bitcoin developer community is vigilant, and discussions about this topic have been ongoing for years. There have been in-depth conversations within the community involving developers, miners, node runners, and users. In fact, candidate algorithms for implementation already exist, and there are currently wallet implementations capable of resisting quantum attacks.
Concerns about quantum computers in mining also fail to consider that, historically, hardware improvements—from CPUs to GPUs and ASICs—have been integrated gradually. Similarly, the integration of quantum hardware would also undergo a transition period rather than being a sudden event.
Finally, any quantum threat would not be unique to Bitcoin. Banking systems, defense infrastructures, telecommunications, and global commerce all rely on robust cryptography, just like Bitcoin. If quantum computers ever reach that capability, they will trigger a coordinated global response before Bitcoin is uniquely compromised.
In summary, Bitcoin’s security model is adaptive, and the network as a whole is capable of evolving faster than any realistic quantum threat could pose.

Question 6

Is Bitcoin primarily used by criminals?

Accepted Answer

The argument that Bitcoin is used for criminal purposes is misleading and not supported by real facts and data. Although Bitcoin, like any financial tool, can be used for nefarious purposes, this does not make it illicit. For example, cars do not cause accidents; drivers do. Similarly, Bitcoin is a neutral asset whose morality depends on the user.
According to Chainalysis, only 0.34% of all cryptocurrency transactions conducted in 2024 were linked to illicit activities. This means that 99.6% of all Bitcoin transactions were perfectly legitimate and carried out by millions of users seeking to make payments, save, and enhance their financial sovereignty.
Typically, criminals are among the first to adopt new technologies. However, as Bitcoin continues to mature, it becomes a poor choice for conducting illicit activities. Bitcoin’s public blockchain permanently records all transactions, making it one of the least private financial systems in history. Through blockchain analysis, law enforcement can track funds, proving that Bitcoin is a bad choice for illicit activities.
Moreover, regulations implemented in recent years, from KYC (Know-Your-Customer) measures to anti-money laundering policies and blockchain analysis, have made using Bitcoin for money laundering much riskier. In contrast, hundreds of billions of dollars are laundered annually in the traditional banking system.
With any transformative technology—cars, nuclear energy, or pharmaceutical drugs—there are trade-offs and compromises. For instance, cars revolutionized human mobility but can also, unfortunately, take lives. This is not a reason to ban cars.
The benefits of Bitcoin as a decentralized and censorship-resistant network far outweigh the small fraction of potential misuse. Judging Bitcoin based on its association with criminal activities ignores the enormous potential this technology has to empower individuals and enable innovation in the traditional financial system. Bitcoin deserves an informed and balanced evaluation without sensationalism.

Question 7

Can governments ban or confiscate Bitcoin?

Accepted Answer

The fear that governments will ban or confiscate Bitcoin underestimates both the protocol’s design and the economic incentives surrounding it. Bitcoin was developed by Satoshi Nakamoto with the explicit purpose of resisting coordinated attacks from centralized authorities, assuming from the outset that governments, particularly authoritarian regimes, would view Bitcoin as a threat. However, Bitcoin’s decentralization, pseudonymity, and censorship resistance make a ban practically impossible to enforce.
While governments may attempt to restrict access to exchanges, their ability to stop the Bitcoin network is extremely limited. Bitcoin has no central authority, no offices, and no single point of failure. Even in countries where Bitcoin has been banned, such as Nigeria, its use has continued to grow thanks to peer-to-peer (P2P) trading platforms, decentralized exchanges, and VPNs, which make surveillance and enforcement nearly impossible.
Moreover, bans are often counterproductive. History shows that prohibiting something frequently amplifies curiosity and demand (the Streisand effect). Attempts to restrict Bitcoin would likely increase the need for innovation, accelerating the development of new privacy tools, decentralized infrastructure, and other censorship-resistant technologies. Ultimately, developers would respond to government pressure by making Bitcoin even harder to control and track.
Confiscating Bitcoin is equally impractical. Unlike gold, Bitcoin is intangible and crosses borders effortlessly. It can be securely stored in cold storage, protected by cryptographic private keys, or even memorized as a 12-word seed phrase. If coerced, a Bitcoin holder could simply claim to have lost their keys. Governments cannot seize what they cannot locate. It would be akin to trying to ban a language.
Furthermore, a global effort to ban Bitcoin is highly unlikely. Countries would compete rather than cooperate. While some might attempt to impose restrictions, others would seek to embrace Bitcoin to attract talent, capital, and innovation. This competitive dynamic mirrors other technological paradigm shifts in the past: nations that resisted transformative technologies were left behind, while those that embraced them early gained economic power.
Additionally, Bitcoin is already deeply integrated into the traditional financial system. With the approval of Bitcoin ETFs in 2024 in both the US and Europe, and with billions of dollars allocated by retail and institutional investors, any attempt to ban the asset would cause harm not only to individuals but also to companies, financial funds, and even governments themselves.
Bitcoin’s decentralization, borderless nature, and widespread adoption ensure that, while governments may create obstacles, they cannot stop or confiscate Bitcoin on a large scale. Any ban would likely have no significant impact on the network and could even be counterproductive, ultimately strengthening Bitcoin.

Question 8

Is Bitcoin harmful to the environment?

Accepted Answer

The argument that Bitcoin consumes too much energy and harms the environment is based on incomplete information, oversimplified comparisons, and narratives that fail to reflect factual reality. When we examine the facts, it becomes clear that Bitcoin’s role in global energy consumption is far more positive than its critics suggest.

Firstly, Bitcoin’s energy consumption must be analyzed in context. The traditional banking system consumes significantly more energy than the Bitcoin network by maintaining a vast infrastructure that includes skyscrapers with offices, thousands of branches, extensive ATM networks, armored vehicles, and paper-based systems, all of which combined have a much greater environmental impact and cost than Bitcoin.

In contrast, Bitcoin operates a single decentralized network with an infrastructure orders of magnitude smaller than the traditional monetary system. Even the Bitcoin Lightning Network is millions of times more efficient in processing transactions than the global banking network. The narrative that Bitcoin uses too much energy lacks support when we consider the enormous energy expenditures of the infrastructure Bitcoin aims to replace.

Moreover, Bitcoin mining is increasingly powered by renewable energy. It is estimated that the Bitcoin network consumes about 0.6% of global energy production, but around 60% of global Bitcoin mining is powered by renewable sources. In several regions, miners operate with 100% renewable energy, making Bitcoin one of the most environmentally friendly industries globally. Critics often overlook a crucial fact: Bitcoin miners actively seek the cheapest available energy, which, thanks to technological advances and subsequent cost reductions, is increasingly renewable.

Additionally, one of Bitcoin’s greatest contributions to sustainability is its ability to monetize stranded and wasted energy. Unlike traditional industries, Bitcoin miners do not need to be located in cities or specific population centers. In fact, they can relocate to areas where energy is cheapest and most abundant, often remote regions where renewable energy is produced in excess but goes unused.

In Texas, USA, miners purchase surplus wind and solar energy, helping to stabilize the electrical grid. In Kenya, companies set up Bitcoin mining infrastructure powered by solar energy, investing in the electrification of small villages and towns where they operate. In Zimbabwe, Bitcoin mining supports investment in electrical and energy infrastructure in areas facing energy shortages. Without Bitcoin, this energy would simply be wasted. Bitcoin acts as a financial engine, enabling the growth of renewable energy and the development of rural areas.

In fact, the primary cost for a miner is electricity. Thus, a miner can only remain competitive and profitable if they can secure electricity at a low cost. If another buyer can outbid the maximum price a miner is willing to pay for energy to remain profitable, that energy will not be used for intensive Bitcoin mining.

Furthermore, Bitcoin mining also plays a significant role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Several companies capture flared methane, a potent greenhouse gas, and convert it into electricity for Bitcoin mining. Since methane is far more harmful than CO₂, using methane for Bitcoin mining significantly reduces overall emissions. Over time, the Bitcoin network could even become carbon negative, turning a major environmental burden into a productive resource.

Ultimately, the debate over the Bitcoin network’s energy use is a debate about values, and power structures have always sought to shape society’s perception of what they deem valuable or wasteful. Data centers powering social media, streaming services, and the banking system rarely face the same level of scrutiny. Bitcoin is singled out because it challenges entrenched power interests—from banks seeking to maintain their monopoly to governments aiming to retain control over money. Bitcoin’s environmental critics serve as tools for these power structures to discredit a system that threatens the traditional financial industry.

In summary, Bitcoin is far from an environmental threat. On the contrary, it is accelerating the adoption of renewable energy, unlocking access to wasted energy, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and helping to electrify rural areas. Bitcoin’s flexible economic incentives make it a catalyst for the production and use of clean energy globally. Bitcoin’s energy consumption is not a problem to be solved. In reality, it is part of the solution for building a sustainable and decentralized future.

Question 9

Why is Bitcoin volatile?

Accepted Answer

The volatility of Bitcoin is often criticized as a flaw. However, it is necessary to consider the disruptive nature of the innovation that Bitcoin represents.

All paradigm-shifting technologies—from the internet to electricity—experienced turbulent and phased adoption before achieving mass adoption and stability. From this perspective, volatility is not a flaw but rather a part of growth.

Unlike fiat currency, which can be infinitely expanded by central banks, Bitcoin has a limited token supply (21 million). The inelastic nature of its supply amplifies price fluctuations in response to changes in demand. However, volatility is decreasing as adoption and market liquidity increase, holders of this asset discover Bitcoin’s role as a monetary network, and their conviction grows, which increases their reluctance to sell.

Critics of Bitcoin often focus on the short-term, momentary movements of its price. However, from a long-term perspective and for investors with an extended time horizon, these sharper price movements are merely noise and become less significant, giving way to a consistent upward price trend.

Thus, we should view volatility as more than just risk. Bitcoin’s volatility can be seen as a manifestation of investor interest and the ease with which the asset attracts capital and generates liquidity. When observing price movements through this lens, it becomes clear that the fluctuations represent the market’s attempt to discover Bitcoin’s value as a technology, network, and asset as adoption grows.

Therefore, Bitcoin’s price reflects the real-time sentiment of its holders, which fundamentally measures the collective understanding of its value. As knowledge and adoption increase, Bitcoin’s volatility is likely to decrease, reinforcing its role as an emerging asset.

Bitcoin’s volatility is a sign of its transition from an emerging asset to a global store of value. Like all transformative innovations, it will also face skepticism and market turbulence before achieving widespread adoption and stability.

Question 10

Are there other cryptocurrencies better than Bitcoin?

Accepted Answer

The idea that another cryptocurrency could eventually surpass Bitcoin fails to understand what Bitcoin is and why it is irreplicable as a technology and network. Bitcoin is not just software. It is a global, decentralized monetary network that has been growing organically for over 15 years. While anyone can copy its software, what truly sets Bitcoin apart is the unique and chronologically irreplicable network effect developed over all these years.

This network now consists of tens of thousands of computers spread across the world, has attracted hundreds of millions of dollars in specialized hardware that secures the network, and currently has over 200 million users worldwide. This level of adoption, proliferation, and infrastructure cannot be recreated with the launch of another token.

Moreover, Bitcoin’s origin story is also unrepeatable. Bitcoin emerged uniquely: it was born from the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis, featured an open and fair token distribution, and had a creator who stepped away from the project, allowing the network to become truly decentralized.

There was no pre-mining of tokens, and there were no distribution agreements for early investors. Today, most other cryptocurrency projects carry the shadow and skepticism of distribution agreements, foundations, and other governance mechanisms. Thus, most cryptocurrency projects can be seen more as private companies, with their tokens behaving similarly to stocks. Buying one of these tokens is akin to investing in the success of the project, much like investing in a startup by purchasing its shares.

Unlike other cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin has no CEO or foundation with disproportionate power making critical decisions about the network’s future. Bitcoin’s decentralization and censorship resistance are the primary factors that make people trust and use it as a store of value and a means of transferring value.

In fact, many alternative cryptocurrencies do not even aim to be global, neutral digital money and instead focus on other functionalities like programmability and smart contracts. However, monetary network effects are the strongest of all. Once a monetary network achieves credibility, recognition, and liquidity, replacing it becomes extraordinarily difficult. For much of the world, Bitcoin and crypto are synonymous, and it is becoming increasingly clear that markets are converging on Bitcoin as a global, neutral, and independent monetary protocol.

Bitcoin is a monetary network that can only emerge once in history. Any other token or network that arises cannot replicate the conditions, adoption curve, or credibility that make Bitcoin unique.

Building the Future of Bitcoin in Portugal

News

ROTHBARD 100 — The Greatest Libertarian event ever held in Portugal

New Bitcoin Institute is created to put “Portugal at the forefront”

IPB announces partnership with Bitcoin Policy UK

Values

Lead

Influence

Sovereignty

Education

Inclusion

Community

Research

Bitcoin: Energy as the True Currency

The Samourai Wallet Case and the Future of Self-Custody

Portugal must accumulate Bitcoin before its allies and adversaries

Why does Bitcoin have value?

Bitcoin is a Timechain

Bitcoin is not crypto

Education

The Lightning Network: A Scalability and Evolution Solution for Bitcoin

How does a Bitcoin Transaction work?

Anatomy of a Bitcoin Wallet

Proof-of-Stake is not equivalent to Proof-of-Work

Why run a Bitcoin node?

How to Prove Bitcoin Ownership

Partnerships

Frequently Asked Questions

Documents

Join us