In this context gold only has a basic remit which is to counter inflation, any price rise should be in line with inflation on going and so gains are far closer (long term) to neutral to zero when adjusted for loss of value in any particular currency.
Its extremely unlikely Bitcoin or any technology replaces gold because they are not in the same asset class really, to say no more gold would be to eliminate an entire type of asset possible. There are other commodities but most of them are heavily industrial or not quite fungible in the same way and so unsuitable for consideration as base money in the way that gold has been for many thousands of years. Anything can resemble money, if someone wants to argue we switch over to a bias of 90% BTC and gold is far less used vs its previous backing then thats arguable.
I dont give any credence to believing it no longer exists as an asset, its bound to be very useful in the simplest of ways as FIAT fails in various ways. My only thought on that is native populations who left gold on the floor where it lay for the useless heavy but soft rock it is. They were nomadic tribes existing in alignment with the great Buffalo herds across the entire continent, they didnt even seem to have a fixed idea on land ownership. I believe they had no place for gold in their system of value because it was heavy and useless to them, it would have equated to a negative to have ownership of this no matter how pretty it might have been crafted like other cultures did from early times.
So now if we value gold as nothing I could only believe this if our entire population became nomadic and so the weight of everything and practicality on hunting fields was most relevant. Nothing is impossible but I dont see any scenario in which civilizations switch to that extent in my lifetime.
How can you invest/HODL if you don't save money to use for investing/HODLING? Gold hodlers, and Bitcoin hodlers are small niches, and might continue to remain to be small niches because no savings.