Thread

Calling for a quantum fork TODAY would clearly be contentious. Everything I'm proposing is PLANNING so that we have well thought out options to choose from in the future IF quantum computing progresses to the point of being a real concern.

I've already started stacking litecoin

rofl welcome brethren

That type of scheme is theoretically doable but I don't find it practical because almost nobody is going to bother.

I dunno man, money can motivate people.

That's one major issue. Other issues are incentivizing procrastinators to upgrade their security, plus protecting users from losing their coins to an attacker.

Personally, I don't think price action is a valid reason to make these changes. Lots of people and institutions would get rekt if over leveredged and we'd come out stronger, no? From a game theory angle, let's look at me, an economic node. Albeit a small one, but probably somewhat indicative of other vendors around the world producing value and trading it for sats. If the at risk coins are stolen and flood the market then for the period of time while price is suppressed I trade my goods for more sats. I don't see the incentive to switch if it comes down to a hard fork. I think people like me are "sticky" to our current node implementations and individually we may seem insignificant we are definitely here in the world creating value and storing it in sats. Cumulatively we're worth something. So we would still be here, doing lots of small transactions which would generate fees. Lots of small sat transactions are more valuable to miners than a few big ones if everybody is paying the same fee rate. This, plus the incentive to mine the quantum stolen coins for what would likely be juicy fees makes me think that more miners would choose the original (non-frozen) chain.

For the 99th time, no one is proposing a hard fork.

I'm not saying you are. I'm saying I don't see the incentive for a small economic node, such as myself, to switch to the chain with frozen coins if it comes down to one. Wouldn't a hard fork be almost inevitable? I may be missing something but if some nodes and miners "switch off" old utxos while others don't how could the chain not split? Especially because these frozen utxos will be trying to become active and get into blocks.

The chain only splits if a nontrivial amount of hashrate chooses to resist the soft fork.

I guess it just seems intuitive to me that they would. My intuition hasn't always been right I can admit that, but if the circulating supply doubles or even more then the new coins will be bleeding btc to fees and everybody would want to mine those blocks.