<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Jackk wrote</title><author_name>Jackk (npub183…faslh)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub18384z4sjgdfy7vr76thzwtru7jncysz0hcapwesxqsak44p8aemsyfaslh</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>Reducing FUD and building on ECC is the way, thank you!&#xA;&#xA;How could we even verify the claim of an attack? Literally every spend on Bitcoin looks like a valid spend, how does the community actually verify an attack? &#xA;&#xA;There is an incentive to push this fud because it’s not falsifiable from on-chain data alone, it literally requires us to go to their domain of physics.&#xA;&#xA;Seems to me in the Bitcoin vs Quantum standoff, both sides are pointing guns at each other but only one of the guns loaded.&#xA;&#xA;The question really becomes, is Bitcoin empirical proof for the quantization of time? Is it enough to demand physics to abandon continuous time models?&#xA;&#xA;If this is true, their models are broken.</html></oembed>