pull down to refresh

I’m surprised that the majority is voting for letting the attacker have the coins. What’s the benefit of letting some QC pioneer have several million bitcoin?
If the choice were between the coins being misappropriated or burned, wouldn’t you rather have your coins be lost than a thief benefiting?
142 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 24 Apr
If the choice were between the coins being misappropriated or burned, wouldn’t you rather have your coins be lost than a thief benefiting?
Yes, I would rather have my coins be lost than a thief benefiting, but this poll isn't about my own coins, it's about someone else's coins.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Murch 24 Apr
Fair point!
reply
My only concern is that the established rules are maintained. Supply, no double spending and cryptographic security. If in a supposed and eventual quantum attack someone takes the satoshi coins, it is theft and it is ugly, but the coins have no morals. Key owner problem.
reply
We're not Eth. Bitcoin is not a DAO. We don't steal coins, even when somebody stole them. Which we wouldn't even know if it happened when old coins move.
reply