But if Im reading him correctly, Tadge isn't even really making a "just in case" argument. He doesn't seem to be materially concerned about the threat of quantum at all. He's concerned that quantum is an *optics* problem that slows Bitcoin's adoption. So the change isn't even precautionary -- it's all cost; an expense justified by better marketing.
Discussion
I guess you can read his comments like that, true. I also think he just genuinely finds the question of how to address the potential threat intellectually interesting. Maybe a bit of all three.
Tadge is allowed to be interested in whatever he likes, but on the ground, people see a Bitcoin Dev talking about quantum and they don't read this as some autistic little hobby horse lark. They read the situation as immediate and dire, and they want to know how unsafe they are. So, ironically, Tadge even opening his mouth in a very public fashion is achieving the exact opposite outcome that he is ostensibly trying to avoid.