{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","title":"alberdioni8406 wrote","author_name":"alberdioni8406 (npub1q7…pfzcf)","author_url":"https://yabu.me/npub1q7etlfzq8e4wyks6jxgx5hgqwcsvhhvm0p5rwvf9z96jne4ms9jq3pfzcf","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://yabu.me","html":"Sometimes I’m genuinely impressed by how far Bitcoin Cash has come—and at the same time, by the selective blindness of the wider crypto world outside our ecosystem.\n\nWe’re not standing still. We’re building, iterating, and in many ways thinking ahead of the curve. While others debate narratives, BCH continues to push real-world usability and long-term resilience.\n\nBitcoin Cash has also been exploring stronger security directions, including research and implementation paths around quantum resistance and advanced cryptographic safeguards like Quantumroot security work—things the broader space often only starts talking about after the fact.\n\nMeanwhile, here’s the kind of conversation happening elsewhere:\n\nCZ recently floated an idea along the lines of:\nWhat if quantum computers one day threaten Satoshi’s untouched 1M BTC?\nAnd what if, to “protect the system,” those coins should be frozen after a deadline if they remain unmoved?\n\nThe proposal even raises the extreme implication of permanently locking a large portion of Bitcoin’s supply—something in the tens of billions of dollars—based on protocol-level decisions.\n\nHere’s the discussion: https://x.com/i/status/2068387151058809336\n\nSo the real question becomes:\n\nDo you freeze dormant coins to pre-empt a future quantum risk…\nor do you preserve the original rules no matter what the future brings?\n\nFrom where I stand, Bitcoin Cash feels like it’s already operating in that future-facing mindset—focused on adaptability, real utility, and long-term resilience rather than reactive rule changes driven by fear.\n\nThe world can ignore it if it wants. That’s fine.\nIt just means the building continues without distraction."}