Ryan Sean Adams

Maybe 35% is susceptible to an attack.

You have to imagine people who are trying to stay one step ahead of the zombie attack, they will, and they'll just move addresses to one that is not susceptible to this type of attack.

But if the coins are lost, if there's no access to private keys, then of course you can't move to an address that is not quantum attackable.

And so 1.7 million Bitcoin would be about 8.6% of supply.

And then the other estimates, you know, say that there could be as high as 15% of Bitcoin that's susceptible to this type of thing.

What numbers have you seen?

And what percent of Bitcoin do you think is just like lost and going to be susceptible to a post QDA attack?

Can we be clear on what you mean when you say there's two options, like two options for who?

So we have a scenario where post a Q day.

So if you believe in a Q day, OK, and you clearly do that, it's coming at some point in time.

we will have, say, 10% of all Bitcoin supply that can be attacked by whoever has the best quantum computer at that time.

And attack just means they can go and reach in and get the Bitcoin.

And that can happen in...

like relatively short order over days and weeks and maybe months, but they can pick these addresses off one by one and effectively that 10% can be taken by someone.

You're saying that the Bitcoin community has some options with what to do with that 10% on, I guess, the social layer, on the hard fork layer,

And those options are twofold.

Either they can burn or freeze the coins.

They can effectively say, no, Satoshi, this 10%, Satoshi's amount and some others, these are dead addresses.

We know they're dead.

We don't want them to be quantum susceptible.