Replying to BTCAccountant

I agree that the coins should be left as a bounty. Also, that soft fork would undermine the use of bitcoin for very long term store of value. You could always move your multi-generational savings every 80000 blocks, but why force the extra transaction volume, and why would we want money to expire?

Seems like it's actually a good thing to have the bounty, so that white hat hackers have an incentive to find any possible way to break the signature scheme without actually stealing anyone's coins. They could steal, but world probably be worse of, because it would undermine trust in the asset they just acquired. If they find a security flaw, and help patch it, they have earned the bounty.

Avatar
jimbocoin 🃏 2y ago

I’m also generally of the opinion that insecure coins should remain as a bounty. For the rest of us, it’s a tripwire that signals when it’s time to upgrade security.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.