Changpeng Zhao proposes freezing Satoshi's bitcoins: protection against quantum threats
Binance founder Changpeng Zhao has put forward a radical proposal: give Satoshi Nakamoto 12 months to move his bitcoins before a quantum upgrade to the network. If the coins are not moved, they would be frozen forever. This idea has already sparked heated discussions in the crypto community.
According to Zhao, only about 20 million coins would remain in the new protocol, as the rest would be locked. This is how he described the consequences of the proposed freezing of inactive wallets. The discussion concerns wallets from the early days of Bitcoin, which are considered most vulnerable to quantum computing.
Quantum Threat: Why It Matters
Zhao warns that inaction on this issue is dangerous. If nothing is done, the coins will essentially go to whoever cracks them once quantum computing reaches the necessary level. Traditional encryption methods used in old wallets could be at risk. The idea is to protect vulnerable digital assets before they become accessible to attackers. The one-year window, according to Zhao, would give the owner of inactive coins the opportunity to transfer them to a secure format.
Precedents and Expert Opinions
A similar proposal was previously put forward by Ava Labs CEO Emin Gün Sirer. He believes that quantum computing could pose a danger to outdated technologies. Wallets from Nakamoto's active period use the Pay-To-Public-Key (P2PK) format, which fully exposes the public key. Sirer noted that modern wallets and systems, such as Avalanche, do not use P2PK, but it was used in the early days of Bitcoin. Therefore, in his view, when quantum computing becomes a real threat, the community should consider freezing Satoshi's coins or setting a deadline for transferring all coins from the P2PK format.
Expert comment from Cryptalist: The idea of freezing Satoshi's bitcoins is not just a technical issue, but a fundamental challenge to the principles of decentralization and blockchain immutability. On one hand, protection against the quantum threat is a necessity, but on the other, such measures create a dangerous precedent where the community can intervene in asset management, which contradicts the very essence of Bitcoin. The resolution of this dilemma will determine the future of the entire industry.