While we cannot make this decision on behalf of a theoretical future Bitcoin community, I think burning vulnerable bitcoin is inevitable.
First of all, I think it’s the right decision. In a world where a CRQC (cryptographically relevant quantum computer) is on the short-term horizon, these coins will not remain with their original owners. No amount of hopium will solve that. Instead your options are only (a) freeze or (b) let some CRQC owner eventually steal them. I definitely prefer (a).
Luckily, it doesn’t have to be a lot of coins - any addresses which were created from a standard seed phrase + HD derivation can be recovered with a QC-safe ZK proof. It’s only the very very old coins (or more esoteric wallets) that would be frozen.
Finally, it’s worth pointing out that I think this is inevitable. In a theoretical future where a CRQC is on the horizon, both forks will exist. The market will ultimately decide which bitcoin they value more - one with an extra million coins of supply as the CRQC owners steal lost coins or the one without. I cannot imagine the market preferring the former.
View quoted note →
Matt Corallo
Matt Corallo
matt@bitcoin.ninja
npub185h9...wrdp
10th known contributor to Bitcoin Core. Now Full-Time Open-Source Bitcoin+Lightning Projects at Spiral (Part of Block).
I think most Bitcoiners haven’t fully grokked how much work Gloria (and Greg Sanders and others) did to get package relay and zero-fee anchors and TRUC over the line and how absolutely critical this work is to Lightning, Ark, Spark, and nearly everything bitcoiners are going to be using over the next few years.
Bitcoin is going to zero if this fork activates.
A few devs deciding it’s okay to seize people’s money just because they use the same feature as some spammers use isn’t even remotely bitcoin.
View quoted note →
TIL in the US banks often share every transaction you make with third party credit reporting services (not the big three, ones dedicated to checking/savings account credit risk). You can view the report under the FCRA, but anyone can access your report (as long as they promise it’s to “provide services to you”).


Why on earth would you use or promote a wallet that lies to its users about how their funds are stored?
View quoted note →
Please don’t run 28 over some overblown drama. At least run 29 (or if you’re running Knots please tweak the default configuration to not block Lightning).
View quoted note →