Issue with not being proactive is the time it would take to migrate all the coins in cold storage to unsecure wallets to new secure wallets. It could take years if we fill every block to migrate to modern wallets
Thread
Login to reply
Replies ()
Being proactive only makes sense if the threat is real. If the threat is linguistic, psychological, and narrative-based, then the correct form of proactiveness is not altering Bitcoin, it would be to defend its ontology.
If what I said is true, the real danger is the narrative convincing Bitcoiners to act as if the threat exists.
It seems imperative to find the truth.
If it weren't for taproot revealing the pubkey it wouldn't matter. Go read up on the deceptive argument they gave.
Oh, it needs to be 256bit anyway so why hash it?
Lol. IMO it's proof that the devs of most bitcoin software and protocol are compromised.
IMO by 2 more carvings, bitcoin is de facto USD CDBC. just needs covenants.
I'm not fooled. But most of yalls are gullible.