Makes sense! The only thing I’m wary about is this:
“Old coins, coins that haven’t moved in years, some dormant since the single-digit price days, are suddenly active. Not all at once. Not in panic. But steadily this year but especially since the summer. Methodically. Addresses that accumulated when Bitcoin was a cypherpunk experiment are finally moving their holdings.”
If a sufficiently advanced actor would’ve developed the quantum capability needed to attack Bitcoin, this is exactly how it would look like.
I don’t actually think that’s the case though. And also, that wouldn’t change the actual effects of the redistribution, so maybe wouldn’t even matter!
Login to reply
Replies (1)
How would you prove the coins were taken by an attacker and not just moved by their owner? You can’t.
There’s no separate signature, no measurable distinction, just narrative. It’s trust all the way down.