The "Epic Cleanup" of 2021 has already undergone a stress test: at that time, China's computing power share plummeted from over 65% to nearly zero. Bitcoin's price was halved, but the network did not collapse and subsequently entered a new bull market. Today’s bans are more about "normalizing risk mitigation" rather than destructive blows.

1. Why can the market withstand it?
Decentralization of hash power: The global mining center has long since shifted. The United States (~38%), Russia (~15%) have become the main forces, with China currently accounting for only about 14% (ranking third). Even if China again enforces a "zero" policy, the impact on the entire network's hash power will be far less than in 2021.
Mining equipment has high liquidity: Mining machines are assets that "reside with electricity." The ban will only cause physical relocation of mining rigs to the Middle East, Central Asia, or North America, and hash power will recover within weeks, not permanently disappear.
Shift in pricing power: Currently, the price of the currency is more influenced by US ETF capital flows, Federal Reserve policies, and institutional holdings. The marginal influence of Chinese retail investors and miners on global pricing has greatly diminished.
2. What actual impacts will it have?
Short-term pain (price and selling pressure): Closure of mining farms will lead miners to sell their inventory coins to cover migration costs (electricity, freight). During bear markets, this will intensify downward pressure, but usually manifests as a "deep squat" rather than a "zeroing out."
Long-term cost elevation: China’s cheap hydropower was once a global mining cost advantage. Moving hash power to regions with higher electricity prices will systematically raise Bitcoin’s "production costs" (currently around $30,000–$40k), which will become an important long-term support level for the price.
A more decentralized network: Hash power distributed more evenly across the globe reduces the risk of centralized network security threats from any single country's policies.
3. The only "collapse" risk
A true collapse only exists for highly leveraged speculators. If you use 10x or 20x leverage to go long, a 20%-30% short-term fluctuation caused by bans could wipe you out. But for Bitcoin’s network itself and spot holders, this is just another cyclical regulatory shuffle.
Conclusion: View bans as a "hash power migration" rather than "market end." They will make mining more expensive and more globalized, but cannot kill a global network with a market capitalization of trillions of dollars. #Gate广场四月发帖挑战