by definition, you would have to do this preemptively to any “quantum attack” which may never come. it’s a nice talking point though.

Clearly. And no one is seriously claiming this should be done today. What we're saying is we should be PLANNING today for all possible contingencies.

We need to freeze Satoshis Bitcoin to stop someone getting rich if they hack him!!! Yeah um, if quantum computing is a threat to Bitcoin, it's a threat to the entire financial system, all cryptography etc. In which case none of it matters. You're proposing seizing and freezing people's Bitcoin over a fake threat which if it was real would be a bigger threat to everything else anyway.

Planning as a word is contentious and raising hackles. Discussing possible responses isnt contentious. We're a long way from planning stages. That's for when you want to get detailed on a particular proposal that's arisen through discussion.

In a Pascal's wager sort of sense. The thing is, for this to work, it'd have to be done BEFORE a quantum threat arises. And it never may. But let's just assume we need to operate like it will for fear of the theoretical repecussions however unfounded they are. At least the thief is honest about what they are. You have the audacity to suggest your theft is somehow justified.

I am. Planning to buy some cheap sats when some treasure hunters show up. And then planning to be sad when it ends faster than anyone expected because they can only be compromised once. Maybe we should freeze Coinbase's coins too as it's only a matter of time before they end up with governance that causes them to blow up, and they hold keys to a huge chunk of the network.