If you can’t prove whether coins were moved by an owner or an attacker, then you can’t prove a “attack” ever occurred. All you’d have is a story, an unverifiable assumption under the guise of science.
To change/“upgrade” Bitcoin over an unprovable threat is to abandon the very principle it was built on: don’t trust, verify.
The chances these long dormant coins are being moved by a nefarious actor is very low
It’s just as likely that a nefarious actor is moving recently attained coins
nostr:nprofile1qqsqt6gwlarurc8v4aw9hh2vkfdedxfh9zngmza0tlw4e66wf3fzvjqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgqg7waehxw309aex2mrp0yhx66twv3ejucm0d5hkummnw3ez7a33447ce7 does some great on-chain anlaysis looking at long-term holder behaviour
And frankly it explains so well why we get sell-side pressure when the price runs
People have made a amazing returns, far better than any other asset class, and it makes sense to cash some in
I believe that’s what we’re seeing
In general I agree. Except new coins are much less likely to be attacked, because people routinely use HD wallets these days, so long-range attacks wouldn’t work. There only the short-range attack targeting the funds while they’re in the mempool would be a concern.
It’s primarily old coins in wallets with long-exposed pubkeys that would be first attacked.
Sick pedophile. People will learn the truth about you eventually.
