Plain Text Nostr

<-- back to main feed

thread · root 0000ca3d…18f9 · depth 3 · · selected 0000b53c…1dc2

thread

root 0000ca3d…18f9 · depth 3 · · selected 0000b53c…1dc2

43fabde6…c06a -- 5d [parent] 
|    if it becomes painfully obvious that shor's algorithm will be able to steal from a type of vulnerable address in
|    real life, I'd be okay with hourglassing that type of address. only 1 spend from vulnerable types of addresses
|    per N blocks, enforced at the protocol level. but not before it is obvious. you would have years to migrate.
|    bitcoin is simply not mature enough to be a set-it-and-forget-it store of value and anyone who thinks otherwise
|    is delusional. but outright confiscation is beyond the pale for me.
|    reply [1 reply]
Schroedinger -- 5d
Agree. If it's really possible to crack some certain address types I would be totally fine with a protocol
change, yes. But "freezing" some address types now would wreck the unconfiscatability promise and would make the
network basically useless, at least for me
reply

Write a post

Sign in with a signing-capable method to publish.