attackofthecyborgs

Your education on MSM starts here. americandebunk.com

@0xPhilH @lopp This is not true. Assuring millions of investors that their savings will not be dumped upon and lose value is actually very important to prevent people from fleeing the asset. Bitcoin is easy to replicate. The NETWORK effect is what makes it unassailable.

You may take my word for it or not, but all I can say is that this is not at all the way it is perceived. Putting a footnote does not change the intent, or the fact time is wasted on what ifs instead of solving actual issues. You may disagree, but it is exactly how you marketed it and why folks are mad.

If you think folks are upset about my quantum migration BIP... Wait 'til I get around to formalizing my dynamic block size BIP!

@danheld Libertarians purists keep conflating Wallet freeze with Asset freeze. If a bank says customers MUST upgrade their password to something more secure this year, it isnt the same thing as freezing the money.

I'm anti BIP-361. For those who don't know, it deprecates or freezes coins that don't move after a certain migration date (for post quantum upgrades). It's not a full confiscation of every pre-quantum coin, but a good chunk of them. Bitcoin's primary value props: best monetary policy of any money + extremely hard to seize asset. If the protocol for any reason makes these assets "seizable" (destroyed) through a change in the code, then it impacts both of those value props. Granted, Satoshi's coins being cracked would also negatively impact the perception of seizability. However, intelligent market participants will understand this is the lesser of two evils. For this reason, I'm not for any proposal that allows these coins to become frozen.

@danheld Worse then a 50% drawdown... is the POSSIBILITY of a 50% drawdown... an overhang that doesn't get removed for decades. Millions will flee BTC and refuse to invest. The libertarians will win. The project will surely die.

@notgrubles Good. So they can also move their coins to new wallets given a few years. Which means their coins are not frozen. What's your point?

Nearly every day someone moves coins from the Satoshi era. The concept of “lost” coins is scammer propaganda.

@noremacback @VandelayBTC It is for people to judge what is "ample". For me, a few years is enough. If a bank says customers MUST upgrade their password to something more secure this year, it isnt the same thing as freezing the money.

@attackofthecyb1 @VandelayBTC They have ample time to move their coins according to whom?

There's no scenario where confiscating/freezing coins is acceptable. Regardless of any quantum-enabled dumps. If it all gets dumped on the orderbook one day, so be it. Deja vu. No confiscation. That's .gov stuff and we're all in this to avoid third party risks.

The U.S. naval blockade continues...

LET HIM COOK.

Officially credentialed Pentagon press corps as of today, alongside my interpreter @DataInterpretr. First Deaf journalist to hold the badge. Thank you @JoelValdezDOW for moving mountains to make this unique arrangement possible. Naturally, the legacy media is invited to congratulate the Department of War on their commitment to press corps inclusiveness. This wouldn't have been possible without you. Every $3 subscription and every engagement opened this door. Now I'm going to use it. Military institutional capture research starts today.

@RonSwanonson Bitcoin means different things to different people then. You are not the only ones who "understands" bitcoin. Anyhow, agree to disagree. To me, BIP-361 is not a good thing. It is absolutely necessary.

@attackofthecyb1 Complete bullshit If people sell because of a temporary fiat price then they never understood Bitcoin in the first place. But, you’re not changing any rules. You’re not changing the supply at all…. let the market do its thing Millions of bitcoin get traded every year…

Freeze coins? My gut reaction is fuck that, this is a free market The worst that can happen is they get absorbed over a few years, life goes on and there’s still only 21M Tick tock

@BitcoinErrorLog Not sure what you understood by "scale*. I meant held and used by large fraction of the planet. For savings. And then as currency.

@attackofthecyb1 Bitcoin does not scale.

I am okay with never adding quantum-resistance to Bitcoin and more people should be considering that position.

@200KEKS The hard core libertarians will be dancing from their victory on the grave of bitcoin after millions flee with the price overhead of potentially 4M bitcoins.

TODAY IT’S QUANTUM, TOMORROW IT’S WHATEVER THE REASON TO FREEZE THE BITCOIN. HARD NO FOR BIP361. GFY

@theswansjr Bank own ETFs. People own ETFs. People own Banks ! Ultimately, it is people that own all Bitcoin.

“Bitcoin is fake now that banks own ETFs and control the price with their fake money.” Let’s get this straight. An ETF is a paper wrapper. Bitcoin is a protocol. Banks can own ETFs. They cannot own the network. They can’t change the code. They can’t print more Bitcoin. They can’t alter the issuance schedule. They can’t confiscate your keys. ETFs ≠ Bitcoin. Gold ETFs allowed paper games because gold lives inside the legacy system. Bitcoin doesn’t. Bitcoin is it's own network. It runs on a global settlement network outside traditional finance. Tens of thousands of nodes verify real transactions. No intermediaries. No permission. That’s the difference. Bitcoin isn’t weakened by ETFs. It’s exposed. And it’s still the hardest money ever created.

@Vladcostea Miners would sell them sooner or later like they do for most bitcoins mined. Supply overhang problem does not go away !

Instead of freezing Satoshi’s coins Reissue them as block rewards Make the miners compete for them One 50 BTC UTXO at a time Support the Bitcoin economy, not the bags of institutions that only care about the short term price of BTC against the dollar

@js_757 @blockchainchick BTW, I am openly a bitcoin xaxi. I want the project to actually succeed. Not become a graveyard that the some loony libertarians will be left cheering with.

@attackofthecyb1 @blockchainchick I get your point, but comparing the Bitcoin network to a bank is definitely not how we should be thinking about the protocol

Should Satoshis Bitcoin stack be frozen?

@js_757 @blockchainchick Millions will not hold/buy bitcoin (including institutions) with potential 6M overhang of compromised wallets. Bitcoin can be easily replicated. It's value IS IN THE NETWORK. Practically, the project and adoption will die.

@FixxTheMoneyy @stephanlivera ~6M of Bitcoin is potentially compromised in unhashed wallets. That's a LOT !!

You're missing the network and market being decades more mature, and more flush with liquidity. You're also missing that the selling pressure would not be as massive as you think. The Patoshi coins are in 30k+ UTXOs of 50 BTC each. Even in the most OPTIMISTIC CRQC scenario, this would take FOREVER to crack them all and sell them. So it's more like a slow trickle of sell pressure, rather then a massive 1M coin market dump. Whales have bought over 270k BTC in the last 30 days alone. 1.5M coins is 6~ months of sell pressure. And as we've just established, it will take much longer then 6 months to sell all these coins. Not 6 years. Not even 60 years.

I'm against BIP361, and burning/freezing quantum-vulnerable coins in general, but we should talk supply implications: The pro-freezing camp are arguing that there will be a BIG active, tradeable supply difference. Currently the number of vulnerable BTC is in the 6-7M BTC ballpark. Assume we activate BIP360 P2MR and things like SHRINCS/SHRIMPS. The question is, how many of those currently vulnerable coin owners upgrade? The pro-freezers argue that people may be slow to update if they underestimate CRQC risk and Q-day timing. Quantum-panickers think "it's coming really soon and we won't get a warning". Those of us in the "let the chips fall where they may" (LTCFWTM) camp are more optimistic about voluntary uptake. We tend to see Q-day further out. Quantum-moderates and quantum-deniers expect to see steady progress on quantum tech, which will itself create urgency to move to P2MR + PQ sigs. In the optimistic scenario, MOST of the quantum-vulnerable coins shift over to P2MR, leaving say the ~1.7M 'Patoshi' and other early P2PK coins. Bitcoin's price appreciation gives holders increasing incentive to secure their stack. So in a real Q-day and fork fight: Are the LTCFWTM camp standing ready to buy the hypothetically quantum-dumped coins? How big is the price drop going to be? Bitcoin's market has absorbed huge supply shocks before. e.g. Galaxy's 80k BTC whale, German state (Saxony) selling ~50k BTC, Mt. Gox distributions, GBTC coins 'rotating' into IBIT/FBTC etc. I'm a quantum-moderate (15-20 years out from Q-day) and firmly LTCFWTM. This is how I'm thinking about it. Open to what I'm missing.

@stephanlivera "We tend to see Q-day further out." What YOU see is irrelevant. What matters is that millions will stop holding/buying bitcoin because of the risk of overhang and the value to their property. Practically, the bitcoin project will be dead.