In the cryptocurrency world, the idea of freezing bitcoin assets, which have been dormant for a long time, due to a possible risk, has been brought to the agenda. It is stated that there are approximately 5.6 million BTC untouched since the early years of Bitcoin, and that these assets may be in danger of being stolen with the development of quantum computers. The fact that quantum threats began to be seriously discussed led to deep divisions in the bitcoin ecosystem.
Quantum computing threat raises concern
Experts point out that old wallets and addresses may be seriously affected if such technologies are implemented. It is argued that 5.6 million bitcoins are kept in wallets that have not been traded for years and that a total of 19.8 million bitcoins will be under conditional ownership. Bitcoin developer and Op Net founder Samuel Patt emphasized that freezing assets could lead to a crisis of confidence in the market and shake the fundamental philosophy of independence of bitcoin. It is stated that institutional investors will primarily consider such a decision as a precedent and their risk appetite may decrease.
“Freezing any coin, even lost ones, sends the following message to the market: Approximately 19.8 million bitcoins currently in circulation are in contingent ownership. Corporate risk units look not at the cause, but at the precedent that will be set.”
Jason Fernandes, known as an analyst in the market, stated that if one day the quantum attack is successful, then there may be a much more dramatic decline in the price of bitcoin. Another market commentator, Mati Greenspan, argued that if quantum computers take over bitcoin wallets, there will be no rollback or freezing mechanism in the network, and instead it will be recorded as the biggest mistake in history.
BIP-361 and intra-community disagreements
The new proposal, called BIP-361, presented by Bitcoin developers, brings to the agenda the introduction of a new structure instead of the current encryption system of the network and the freezing of immovable assets. This team, led by Jameson Lopp, thinks that it would be safer to freeze old bitcoins, which are stated to be worth approximately $440 billion. However, there are serious objections to this proposal in the community.
“Bitcoin’s promise of inviolable property rights cannot be defended by breaking it. We operate data centers on four continents and all devices are owned by our customers. The only reason for this model is that bitcoin guarantees unconditional ownership.”
Kent Halliburton, CEO of SazMining, and Khushboo Khullar, partner at Lightning Ventures, argue that the freezing method clearly violates the decentralized nature of bitcoin, its principle of immutability. Khullar also explained that such a step would require a controversial chain split in the network and that no one should have the right to unilaterally freeze coins.
Searching for solutions and different perspectives in the community
Some developers and market players think that there is no complete solution to the quantum threat and that every step taken involves some kind of compromise. Ken Kruger, CEO of Moon Technologies, pointed out the difficulty of making the system completely flawless and said, “Freezing the funds or allowing them to be stolen?” He stated that the answer to the question still has not been found. Fernandes, on the other hand, thinks that the main concern of most of the community is the protection of capital and that ideological debates remain in the background.
“The protocol is not dead, just conservative against change. But the risk of inaction outweighs the issue of precedent.”
Mati Greenspan, on the other hand, stated that most bitcoin advocates prefer the traditional approach over radical steps and that “in many cases, especially with bitcoin, doing nothing is better than doing something.” The general opinion is that the fundamental value of bitcoin is immunity and that damaging this value carries a great risk.
