Quote from: Satofan44 on Today at 06:38:51 PM

You mean to say that adapting these much larger signatures will cause a collapse in security unless we increase the block size, right?

No, I mean that we could not upgrade at all, and leave quantum computing be a threat. I don't see this happening, but it's also another option.

Quote from: Satofan44 on Today at 06:38:51 PM

At first glance it seemed to me that you are trying to say that changing the block size changes the mining economics, which I don't agree with.

I hadn't thought of introducing a new field as stwenhao said, or changing the witness field we currently have. Maybe it's possible to increase the absolute block size without interfering with mining economics.

Quote from: mindrust on Today at 07:06:57 PM

What's the solution then? Can't find. Maybe quantum fud wasn't all fud at all. Time to panic?

It might be a FUD that it will be a threat anytime soon. The problem is that, after many years, it might be too late until the whole network upgrades and endorses the protocol changes. It takes a hell of a lot of time to get consensus in bitcoin. We need to upgrade in the next years, but keep migration optional, if quantum computers do not prove to be threatening.