If this is true (it is IMO) then these so-called “upgrades” and “mitigations” are nothing but injections of doubt into a system that doesn’t need fixing. They defend against a threat that has never been demonstrated, never measured, and never verified. The real attack is psychological: make people believe Bitcoin is broken, and they’ll accept anything in the name of “safety.”
Every proposed “quantum mitigation” is a solution in search of a problem. There is no physical evidence of a threat, only narrative engineering. These proposals operate as social exploits, not technical defenses designed to erode trust in Bitcoin’s thermodynamic finality by convincing users that an unverifiable danger demands centralized intervention.
They aren’t protections; they’re control mechanisms disguised as improvements. They rely on fear of a hypothetical threat to justify changes that compromise Bitcoin’s core premise: verification over trust. The only real vulnerability is the belief that Bitcoin needs saving from the very physics it already enforces.