Quote from: Abiky on November 14, 2024, 04:02:52 PM

Quote from: methnslavery on November 10, 2024, 07:13:22 PM

Hey, this is my first post on this forum. I found it the most relevant forum to share my thought, so I created an account.

We are still getting closer to quantum computing, which in itself wouldn't cause much of an issue to most due to new quantum resistant encryption algorithms. The developers can swiftly fork the network - new quantum resistant addresses will appear. There is just a slight issue, what do we do with addresses which have no owners, or Nakamoto's wallets? Nobody can move the bitcoin from the weak addy to a strong quantum addy. They will be waiting till the day somebody gets access to them by breaking the old standard with quantum computing.

I heard that Satoshi holds over 1M bitcoin on his wallets, he better be alive and active somehow. A theft of 1M btc would cause chaos. Well it wouldn't change how bitcoin works, but you get my point, it is no good. We can neither confiscate the bitcoin or hold it somehow (even if there is a way to do so, it would not bring any good reputation to the situation). We can't transfer the old addy format to the new one obviously. We are left with the option to wait and see whoever gets it first, China, Russia, US..?

Chaos? You mean Satoshi dumping all of his coins on the market? I doubt that will happen. But if it does, that doesn't mean it'll be the end of Bitcoin. Market prices will massively decline until BTC loses about 50% - 60% of its value. It will recover at a slow and steady rate.

In fact, Satoshi getting rid of his Bitcoin holdings can be considered good news. That's because it will eliminate Satoshi's influence on Bitcoin for good. BTC will become stronger and more decentralized as a result. And if you're worried about Quantum computers posing a threat to Bitcoin's existence, then don't be. BTC is as quantum-resistant as it can be. SHA-256 cryptography is rock-solid, while the network hashrate is huge (exahashes) and constantly growing over time. In the worse-case scenario, developers can simply switch to the SHA-512 hashing algorithm and implement Lamport Signatures for complete peace of mind. I'm sure miners and nodes will approve such improvements in no time. That's the beauty of open source. So I'd suggest you sit back and relax. Cheesy

OP's concern actually is about Satoshi's coin got hacked using QC, not Satoshi dumping his Bitcoin. And while QC isn't expected to break SHA-256, it doesn't apply to ECDSA which used by Bitcoin where public key of address revealed when you spend the coin on that address.