A Post Quantum Migration Proposal

The discussion initiates with a critique of the perception that Bitcoin has never before faced existential threats to its cryptographic primitives. It emphasizes the ongoing and rigorous analysis by cryptanalysts and number theorists to uncover potential vulnerabilities within Bitcoin's cryptography, suggesting that the threat posed by quantum computing is not as uniquely dire as sometimes portrayed. The conversation also touches upon the limitations of current efforts to transition to lattice-based cryptographic schemes, highlighting uncertainties about their ultimate efficacy and the potential discovery of novel flaws.

Further discourse raises concerns about proposed measures to address quantum vulnerabilities, specifically the idea of freezing "vulnerable" coins without owner consent. Such actions are seen as setting a dangerous precedent, potentially legitimating future interventions that could undermine fundamental principles of the Bitcoin network. This stance critiques the rationale that protecting Bitcoin's price justifies extraordinary technical interventions, arguing instead for a principle of non-intervention and caution against linking Bitcoin's value too closely with external assets or fiat currencies.

The dialogue also explores the responsibilities and options available to industry stakeholders in light of quantum threats. While acknowledging the legitimate concerns of institutional holders, exchanges, and custodians regarding the impact of quantum computing on their operations, it suggests legal concepts like "force majeure" and technical solutions such as opt-in upgrades to post-quantum cryptography (PQC) schemes as viable paths forward. Additionally, it challenges the notion that preemptive action to protect Bitcoin's price from quantum-induced volatility is necessary or desirable, advocating for a diversified approach to asset holding rather than overexposure to any single asset class.

Finally, the correspondence underscores ethical considerations against confiscating or freezing old, potentially vulnerable coins. It argues for allowing the natural progression of technology to address these issues, suggesting that those with access to quantum computing capabilities should have the freedom to exploit older, weaker cryptographic systems. This perspective values the long-term resilience and adaptability of the Bitcoin community over immediate reactions to price fluctuations or the threat of quantum computing, invoking historical wisdom on endurance and the importance of maintaining core principles in the face of technological challenges.