Charles Hoskinson Claims Bitcoin's Quantum Solution is a Hard Fork That Cannot Protect Satoshi's Coins

Earlier this week, Bitcoin's core developers proposed a plan to freeze 8 million coins to defend against quantum attacks. However, according to a video posted on his YouTube channel, Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson believes this plan will not be able to protect the coins belonging to the network's creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. Hoskinson stated that Bitcoin's proposed defense against quantum computers is both technically incorrect and structurally unable to protect the network's oldest coins, including the approximately 1 million bitcoin attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto. He argued that the proposed BIP-361, which aims to phase out quantum-vulnerable bitcoin addresses, is being presented as a soft fork but would require a hard fork because it invalidates existing signature schemes that users are actively relying on. Hoskinson claimed that the distinction between a soft fork and a hard fork is important, as Bitcoin's development culture has historically opposed hard forks. The BIP-361 authors have described the proposal as a soft fork, which Hoskinson disputes. A soft fork tightens the rules so old software still works but can't use the new features, whereas a hard fork changes the rules so fundamentally that old software stops working entirely and the network splits unless everyone upgrades. The proposal suggests that users with frozen quantum-vulnerable funds could reclaim them by constructing a zero-knowledge proof tied to their BIP-39 seed phrase. However, Hoskinson argued that this approach cannot rescue approximately 1.7 million bitcoin that predate BIP-39's introduction in 2013, including the roughly 1 million coins associated with Satoshi's early mining activity. Those early coins were generated using a different key derivation method from the original Bitcoin wallet software. If the proposal passes in its current form, those coins would remain permanently frozen regardless of whether their original owners ever attempt to migrate. Jameson Lopp, the core developer who co-authored BIP-361, acknowledged that he does not like the proposal and hopes it never needs to be adopted. Hoskinson's critique extends beyond the technical details, arguing that Bitcoin's lack of formal on-chain governance leaves the network unable to resolve these tradeoffs through a structured process.