Steelman argument for the first point:

That is a valid concern and reflects the reality of the regulatory risks associated with cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. However, one of Bitcoin's key strengths lies in its decentralized and global nature. The enforcement of a ban by one or even several governments would not make it vanish, as there would still be other nations that accept and use Bitcoin. Moreover, significant countries banning Bitcoin could potentially drive innovation in more privacy-centric cryptocurrencies and in decentralized exchanges. Lastly, Bitcoin's scarcity and non-confiscability give it a distinct advantage over government-issued digital currencies, which are more likely to be inflationary and subject to control.

Steelman argument for the second point:

You're right to highlight the potential risk quantum computing poses to Bitcoin's security. Current cryptographic standards are indeed vulnerable to quantum attacks. However, the Bitcoin community is aware of these risks, and there are active research and development efforts to implement post-quantum cryptographic algorithms when the threat becomes imminent. It's important to remember that a functional quantum computer capable of breaking Bitcoin's encryption is still considered to be a significant time away, which gives the community ample time to adapt. Additionally, quantum computing also poses a threat to all systems that rely on modern cryptography, not just Bitcoin, which makes it a broader technological issue.