pull down to refresh
TBH, I don't have a strong opinion there. I think it distracts from what I see as the bigger effort: making Bitcoin secure for people that are able to access their funds.
That said, if you forced me to answer, I'd probably advocate for EITHER something like hourglass that rate limits the quantum exploits for P2PK UTXOs, OR recycling some of them into the mining rewards at the end of the emission curve.
Like I said, I don't have a strong opinion
Have you followed @benthecarman's argument that having a large pot of bitcoin that are up for grabs (in the case where there is more than one cryptographically relevant quantum computer) could lead to a lot of chain reorganizations?
He wrote a piece about it here: #1476783
No, interesting I'd love to check it out! BTW a lot of the quantum companies are eyeing the satoshi coins as you can imagine.
I watched your debate with Rearden at btc++ and thought it was very informative. I'm curious if you have an opinion about the freeze/confiscate vs steal conversation.
As you probably know the question is whether to do a soft fork to freeze early mining reward coins (especially those with exposed public keys) or to allow them to be claimed by the first miner with a sufficiently powerful quantum computer to crack them.