PQC - What is our Goal, Even?

In a recent discussion on the effectiveness of P2TRv2 versus P2MR in terms of quantum security, it was argued that while both protocols might offer similar levels of security against quantum threats when considering scenarios where addresses are often reused, there are still notable differences favoring P2TRv2. It is believed that P2TRv2 provides slightly better script privacy and efficiency. Additionally, P2TRv2 supports existing taproot wallet implementations with minimal need for further engineering enhancements, which contrasts with P2MR that would require significant development effort.

The debate also touched on the potential consequences of address reuse in P2MR. Critics of P2MR highlight that its approach could increase the risk of lost coins in wallets that have engaged in address reuse, despite these addresses being upgraded to be quantum-secure. This issue is compounded by the fact that some community responses have not been favorable towards users who mismanaged address usage, which could lead to challenges in recovering coins effectively.

Furthermore, there is an underlying concern about the overall purpose and security of Bitcoin if securing it from quantum attacks remains exceedingly challenging. The argument suggests that if a considerable portion of supposedly secure wallets can still fall prey to quantum hacks, this undermines the resilience and reliability of Bitcoin, potentially causing significant reputational damage to the cryptocurrency.

Overall, the discourse indicates a preference for evaluating these protocols based on multiple factors beyond just their quantum security capabilities, considering the broader implications for privacy, efficiency, and user experience within the Bitcoin ecosystem.