Newsletter #348 destruction BTCs vulnerable

[tsua0002]

Hello,

I open this issue to discuss if the word "destruction of Bitcoin vulnerable" shouldn't be "the freeze of Bitcoin vulnerable" or the permanent lock.

Indeed the term used by Jameson Lopp is mainly freeze, https://mailing-list.bitcoindevs.xyz/bitcoindev/CADL_X_cF=UKVa7CitXReMq8nA_4RadCF==kU4YG+0GYN97P6hQ@mail.gmail.com/

And moreover, destruction of BTC would mean that 21m would no longer be 21m but smaller which I think is wrong.

So, just to be sure lmk if this is correct and if I should open a PR to update this into the #348 or if the update should be done on the next newsletter.