Opt-in PQC makes sense today when the threat is remote.
If the threat becomes imminent then opt-in only becomes far less useful.
Discussion
who decides whether a quantum threat is “imminent?”
why should anyone trust an “altruistic” actor to destroy someone’s property rights before a quantum computer does?
how do you know coins are lost or if someone has chosen not to move to quantum resistant addresses?
I’m sorry but I’m not falling for this bullshit where the network gives away its rights under the guise of an altruistic actor.
It sets a dangerous precedent. In the future, what “attacks” will be deemed serious enough to again infringe on property rights?
bitcoin’s fundamental value comes from the fact that the network cannot under any circumstance freeze your funds. If I choose not to go to quantum resistant addresses, and a quantum computer cracks my keys, that’s on me and it was my choice.
This all stinks of bullshit from someone that wants to infringe on property rights.
Well said !
thanks 🫡 it is very important that we defend property rights in bitcoin or else everything is lost.
Couldn’t agree more. Property rights are sacred.
Seems to me there are more and more conversations in Bitcoin that propose a violation of such rights.
As Bitcoin matures and grows, the frequency of people who wish to violate property rights will likely grow as well.
We must always stand up for what’s right.
spot on
You are 100% correct. Brute force guessing of private keys has always been and will always be a possibility. Once we allow this to be justification for stealing (aka freezing) coins, Bitcoin will cease to provide any assurance of property ownership. Your coins will only be secure as long as the anointed high priests of Bitcoin core say so.
spot on and you summed it up much better than I did🤣
I'll follow u for this.
and I will follow anyone who respects property rights🫡 nice to meet you sir
BIP 6102
This is what Jameson lopp is trying to turn Bitcoin into in case you're wondering
Every individual node operator decides for themselves which rules they accept.
Beyond that, what rules become "Bitcoin" in practice are whatever subset of rules have the overwhelming majority of economic actors enforcing them.
Man your arguments are deeply flawed.
The fact that you think I'm making an argument shows how ignorant you are.
Sounds like a democracy in which human votes are counted.
and only 15% running the latest version... so 85% of nodes will have unspendable coins if your "soft" forks go forward.
you can’t have an honest discussion with someone with dishonest motives.
Or with someone who has no understanding of the issue!
You have no idea what you're talking about, that statistic has no relationship to my BIP.
it tells me 85% of the network just wants to cruise and forcing them to transfer their coins to a new wallet type won't happen.
Those two things are unrelated.
https://blog.lopp.net/when-do-bitcoin-node-operators-upgrade/
