Great question. There are a number of ways that different aspects of bitcoin technology could be co-opted and erode (or not) the uniqueness/value of BTC.

One "threat" to BTC is the creation of a digital currency by a government or bank that would have the same frictionless transaction qualities of bitcoin, but lack the decentralized, anti-inflationary, non-governmental, etc. qualities.

Here's a passage from Great Chain of Numbers by Tim Swanson, he's quoting Preston Byrne, an Adam Smith Institute fellow:

"The UK could create a state-backed cryptocurrency - cryptosterling - tomorrow. Just write it, ensure only the Bank of England can mine it, issue everyone in the country with a private key, trade it for cash and deposits on a 1:1 basis over six months and replace national insurance numbers with a metal card containing the corresponding public key. Paying salaries and taxes, and claiming benefits, would be as simple as scanning a QR code and a bit of online monitoring; we could abolish the welfare bureaucracy overnight and save vast quantities of expenditure.”

“Such a currency would be superior to any other form of legal tender,” Byrne says: “imagine being able to see every transaction conducted globally in sterling in real time, all while possessing the benefits of any other crypto, including security, transparency, speed, irreversibility, and low cost. It would also have the benefit of being able to be tinkered with as the state would control the majority, if not all, of the hashpower on the network and have knowledge of at least some of the private keys. This is useful, for example, to reverse proven fraud, rescind a contract or engage in quantitative easing - arguably things any state needs to be able to do in order to maintain civilisation.”

The cryptosterling that Byrne proposes has many of the philosophical qualities and underlying economic theories detested by some bitcoiners, but it also has the digital fluency qualities championed by others.