Damus
Mmmballin · 21w
https://blossom.primal.net/76ce916289ba89fc23835db8db70e705739af16b42392b41d45ab6a3f5cbbcd9.gif
Hard Cap SOLID Cologne · 21w
This is 100% exactly what our ENEMIES wanted from this nonsense quantum shit!! They WANT to use this as an excuse to destroy it!!
Gwydion · 21w
Such a retarded approach
Trishy · 21w
Nope. I don’t think so
Korhag · 21w
What he suggested maybe half a step less stupid or unethical than thisnone in my opinion “I had a better idea let’s distribute to all that money to the people in need.” Am I the only one to think that is against Bitcoin ethos to decide to open the road for freezing assets 🤔
jgbtc · 21w
The fact that these devs think this is a good idea means it's time for new devs.
Small Batch Steve · 21w
Does removing the temptation do anything to tamp out the massive greed and energy expenditure? That may be a more interesting question
BitcoinSandy · 21w
Errrrrr No !
Matteo · 21w
Why?! I’m happy to be on the left side of the bell curve for this one.
Struggers · 21w
I mean, we’re not going to adopt this but maybe the game theory behind it is that IF and only if a quantum computer exists, they are not going to steal any coins using quantum because there is a possibility that the community implements this as a reaction to the threat
shadowbip · 21w
zap received. means something.
Technician · 21w
Not a great plan.
Scottie · 21w
My two sats. https://youtu.be/o-Q9JWHcQOI
frenchHODL · 21w
"Hi we're here to seize your gold because someone might steal it from you in the future"
charliesurf is rekt · 21w
i love bitcoin support my proposal that destroys bitcoin
LightningBuck · 21w
Hear me out: If quantum ever Gers serious don't freeze coins in legacy addresses, but disable sending coins from legacy to quantum resistant addresses. This way OG hodlers retain "control" over their coins in the same way the had, when they first received them to their wallet. And quantum hackers ha...
Eric can’t Meme 🐰 · 21w
This is the most Jameson Lopp thing of all time
bitsimple · 21w
seems he worried about price affect more than cultural philosophical principles implications as "uncensorable..." here is Mr Lopp proposing "censoring" as what else is it?