I’m just gonna quickly weigh-in on this so you can decide whether you want to talk to me anymore:
If you think we need to freeze coins to prevent them from being stolen you are retarded, gfy.
Login to reply
Replies (10)
Freezing coins is definitely a slippery slope … and I don’t think quantum is a threat this decade.
What's this about freezing coins?
It doesn’t even matter if it is a threat today. My position is exactly the same.
afaict argument is that it compromises Bitcoin security guarantees to allow quantum "mining" of vulnerable addresses.
"fork or die" ensures that security is consistent.
not advocating for it, because I prefer the Wild West.
but that's a plausible argument.
A cohort of people believe that p2pk addresses (satoshis eg) should be frozen as part of a fork because they are susceptible to being stolen by a quantum-enabled actor. I think that is retarded and an obvious violation of the property rights guaranteed by bitcoin.
The solution is to give people the ability to opt-in to quantum resistant addresses, not decide unilaterally for people.
Thank you for the update John. That's very retarded indeed.
Exactly, retards.
Couldn't have said it better so stealing his words 🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️
View quoted note →