 What would Bitcoin Core version 1 look like? I believe the Satoshi first ran Bitcoin D version 0.1. With all of the years of development so far, any ideas what Bitcoin Core version 1.0 could possibly look like? Right now we are at 0.17. I don't know of any plans to move from the subversion numbering to a 1.0 version anytime soon. If you think about it, this could be a 140-year currency, or a 130-year currency. Therefore, we have an issuance horizon that is extremely long. This is still something that is being modified heavily all the time. I think that, as we see in one of the comments from Colin, releasing a 1.0 could and would be interpreted wrongly by many. I agree with that. I don't think there is any point in doing that. I don't see any speculation as to what a version 1.0 would look like, or when anyone would be confident enough to say, we are past the experimental phase, this is in full-blown global production, and is ready for the world. That is a very audacious thing to say when you are building the next generation money. Briz asks, catastrophe, what would happen if all the Bitcoin developers and project maintainers disappeared? Say every Bitcoin developer and project maintainer that has commit access was on the same cruise ship, and it blew up and sank with everyone in it. What would happen to Core? Would Bitcoin just march on without any new developers? Would it turn into an epic battle of the forks? A gruesome thought, but just curious if something happened catastrophic to key individuals, how would Bitcoin survive? First of all, if all the Bitcoin developers and project maintainers were on the same cruise ship, the more likely thing would be some kind of gastrointestinal disease, which would take them all out rather than the ship sinking. Also, I would be very strongly questioning their taste and choices, because cruise ships suck. They are floating hotels that make you seasick and give you food poisoning, and you can't leave. Did I mention I hate cruise ships? Never mind. Let's go back to the theoretical catastrophe. Let's say something happens to a big number of Bitcoin developers. You can also turn this around and say, why wouldn't an interstate actor attack Bitcoin developers, imprison them, force them, coerce them into not contributing any more or worse? Once you understand how open-source communities work, first of all, Bitcoin Core is not the only client out there. There are multiple implementations of the Bitcoin Core protocol that are interchangeable and compatible. C++ implementation called Libitcoin, for example, which was a project started by Emeritaki, and continued by a number of very talented developers today. Bitcoin, which is a JavaScript node implementation of the Bitcoin protocol. Full node, which is multi-threaded, compartmentalized, modular, and highly performant, created by JJ and a bunch of other developers who started out at purse.io. There is BTCD, which is a Go implementation in the Go language. In fact, most likely, rather than a battle of the forks, you would see other clients becoming more prominent, if Bitcoin was no longer developed in the core package, was no longer maintained and developed. Other implementations of the node software, which did implement new features, would become more prominent. Also, we are talking about a very large number of developers. There are probably 300 or 400 people who contribute to Bitcoin at least once a year in various projects. Although there are a dozen or so who are very prominent and do a lot of the work, that doesn't mean that other people couldn't step up. This would create a vacuum, and the vacuum would be filled by other people stepping up and taking a more prominent role. People who have been learning gradually in these various projects. Essentially, nothing would happen. The project would continue. There are enough interests, enough trained developers, enough people who could learn very quickly, and who would be very interested in taking a greater role in a project like that. Quite honestly, you would see an opportunity to contribute more strongly. It is quite intimidating when you have all of these world-class cryptographers, mathematicians, and developers, that you think, oh, my little contribution is going to be laughed at. Mine certainly have been laughed at, and that's okay. But the bottom line is, there are many talented people who lurk in the shadows, and are not necessarily contributing at the moment, but would step up quite easily. Nothing would happen to the project, which is also why there is absolutely no point in coercing or imprisoning or worse, any of the developers, because there is no center. There is no irreplaceable individual. There is no central point of failure. This is a recipe, and there are many cooks who can cook this recipe, and who can continue to enhance and improve this recipe. You can't stop a recipe by taking out some of the cooks.