The proposal to freeze dormant bitcoin, valued at approximately $440 billion, has sparked intense debate among cryptocurrency experts and enthusiasts. Proponents of the idea argue that it is necessary to protect the tokens from potential theft through quantum computing, which could compromise the security of the bitcoin network.
However, others contend that such a move would undermine the fundamental principles of bitcoin, including its decentralized nature and the inviolability of property rights. According to Samuel 'Chad' Patt, founder of Op Net, freezing any coins, even those considered lost, would set a dangerous precedent and potentially trigger a massive sell-off. 'Institutional risk desks do not care about the reason, they care about the precedent,' Patt said.
Jason Fernandes, a market analyst, agrees that a successful quantum attack would have severe consequences, but believes that the threat of quantum computing requires a pragmatic approach. 'Institutions won’t just price precedent, they’ll price whether the system can survive a break in its core assumptions,' Fernandes said. The debate has been ongoing, with some experts advocating for a freeze, while others propose alternative solutions, such as better tooling and voluntary migration.
Mati Greenspan, a self-described maximalist, suggests that if quantum computers were to crack early Bitcoin wallets, it would trigger the largest bug bounty in human history, rather than a rollback or freeze. The discussion follows the release of Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 361 (BIP-361), which contemplates phasing out bitcoin’s current cryptographic signatures and potentially freezing assets that fail to migrate.
Kent Halliburton, CEO and co-founder at SazMining, believes that the intentions behind BIP-361 are good, but argues that freezing dormant coins would be a deeply flawed approach. 'You don't defend Bitcoin by breaking its core promise of inviolable property rights,' Halliburton said. Khushboo Khullar, venture partner at Lightning Ventures, also opposes the idea of freezing dormant coins, citing the potential violation of bitcoin’s decentralized ethos.
However, not all maximalists agree, with some believing that Lopp’s proposal is sensible and necessary to protect the network from quantum threats. Ultimately, the decision to freeze dormant bitcoin or not will have significant implications for the cryptocurrency’s future, and experts remain divided on the best course of action.