This may most likely get closed because of inconsistent moderation on what does and would not represent an opinion. Numerous attention-grabbing technical questions require some aspect of opinion and this web site caters for a number of solutions to the identical query so I am not fully positive why an inconsistent crackdown on opinions is critical. Clearly this is not a web site for authorized recommendation so I will not contact on the authorized side.

The almost definitely assault vector I can see towards Bitcoin proper now’s by way of the utilization of inscriptions. Not like Ethereum NFTs, that are simpyl URLs, Bitcoin Inscriptions are the indelible storage of knowledge on chain for the remainder of eternity.

I don’t see this as an assault vector in any respect. OP_RETURN has allowed as much as 80 bytes of knowledge to be saved in an output for years relationship again to Bitcoin Core variations previous to 0.10 (2015). If it actually was an assault vector it might have been disabled a few years in the past. There’ll at all times be methods to incorporate a comparatively small variety of bytes in a transaction as a transaction is only a set of bytes/bits that meet the consensus guidelines. You might argue that the OP_RETURN restrict needs to be smaller however 80 bytes is just not large. Apparently a 1×1 gray pixel JPEG is 125 bytes for comparability.

Adversaries of Bitcoin are more likely to inscribe hundreds of illicit photographs onto the bottom layer of Bitcoin. Notice that the FBI has the world’s largest assortment of CSAM. Each time they bust a case, they retailer every thing.

That is additionally nothing new. Relationship again years we will count on unhealthy actors to incorporate knowledge referencing illicit photographs in transactions on the blockchain. The illicit photographs themselves are too massive to retailer in say a single Bitcoin output, transaction or block so it’s merely references and inscriptions. It’s attainable they may very well be break up and unfold over many blocks however this is identical as splitting a bootleg picture into many fragments after which sending a number of emails with a single letter in them. Banning or censoring e mail for that reason is clearly ludicrous as would makes an attempt to ban or censor the blockchain (to the extent that this is able to even be attainable).

This might consequence within the deplatforming of Bitcoin Core from Github and the prosecution of core builders.

There are alternate options to GitHub and Bitcoin Core as a mission might nonetheless perform (though much less effectively) with no central repository say by emailing patches to maintainers. Authorized motion towards builders (sadly) can also be nothing new.

Core builders ought to be a part of Bitcoin firms and develop standalone implementations of Bitcoin Full Nodes.

Some Core builders already work or are funded by Bitcoin firms. Various Bitcoin implementations exist, each consensus suitable forks of Bitcoin Core like Bitcoin Knots and rewrites of Bitcoin Core in numerous completely different languages e.g. libbitcoin in C++, bcoin in Javascript, btcd in Go. Bitcoin Core is the dominant implementation on the community and there have been cases of a few of these rewrites of Bitcoin Core falling out of consensus with Bitcoin Core and never being as performant.

Can Bitcoin survive with out Bitcoin Core?

Close to the title of your query I actually assume so. In a long run worst case state of affairs the place Bitcoin Core was completely compromised by unhealthy actors a code repository might be forked and distributed outdoors of the Bitcoin Core GitHub group. It could clearly be disruptive however Bitcoin’s future needn’t and should not completely relaxation on a GitHub group not being compromised.