If Bitcoin maxis were really half as confident in BTC as they pretend to be most times, they would love to have someone hack Satoshi’s wallet and dump that $49 - $91 billion on the market because what could be better than being able to buy some cheap Bitcoin again right?

Crashing to $900 wouldn't really matter because Bitcoin was always a long-term bet and that's simply one hell of a discount to get behind, no?

Want to know what they are doing instead?

They are flirting with the idea of burning Satoshi’s supply alongside all other lost bitcoins — whatever that means.

First of, it really is stupid to sit at a distant and label any Bitcoin supply to be lost. It does not matter what you think, inactivity isn't proof of the assets being lost. I mean, if we are really looking at the facts, the only thing potentially lost are private keys and not the Bitcoin supply because that's simply an impossible scenario given the design of decentralized blockchains.

Labeling any part of bitcoin supply as “lost coins” is like saying that money in a vault is lost simply because the keys are not accessible. And then going as far as suggested we get rid of the vault so that nobody can potentially gain access to it someday?

In what world does that make sense?

There are several articles I'll quote to highlight what's really being discussed here. The first article was published in Dec 10, 2024.

#1

Concerns over the security of Bitcoin’s earliest transaction formats have reignited debate about the fate of Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1 million BTC as advancements in quantum computing pose potential threats to the cryptocurrency.

The concern arises due to the vulnerability of Bitcoin’s earliest transaction format, pay-to-public-key (P2PK), which exposes public keys on the blockchain.

Satoshi’s BTC resides in the earliest P2PK outputs, a transaction format no longer commonly used because it exposes the owner’s public key. — Cointelegraph

#2

Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino claims quantum computing will hack Bitcoin in “lost wallets” and return it to circulation — a move one trader warns could drag Bitcoin back to the “stone ages.”

Some experts are of the opinion that Satoshi should have their 1 million Bitcoins frozen to prevent exploitation. — Cointelegraph

#3

The Bitcoin community continues to debate whether allowing the recovery of lost BTC by hackers using quantum computers would be ethical.

Jameson Lopp, the chief security officer at Bitcoin custody company Casa, recently argued against allowing quantum recovery of lost BTC and said that burning these coins to protect the integrity of the protocol was the preferable option.

According to Lopp, allowing individuals or institutions with quantum computers to recover lost coins violates the Bitcoin network's properties of censorship resistance, transaction immutability, and conservatism. — Cointelegraph

I'm just going to jump right ahead and use one of my swear privileges to say: What The Actual Fuck?

Article #3 is what leads back to the rest as it is the most recent and it is genuinely the peak of the highlights of how so out of touch these people are.

Two things are agreeable:

—Quantum computers are a threat.

—Bitcoin community should fight to avoid QCs being able to recover any BTC.

Everything else discussed here are stupid. First off, if 5% of your network's native asset supply is enough to send you back to the stone ages, essentially meaning that it is a massive threat, then maybe your pretty orange chain isn't as “secure” as you've preached over the years.

Sure, it's possibly $91 billion at current prices, but it's 5% and supply isn't even a factor in governance, has the community now become hyper focused on numbers going up and staying up that core designs are now ignored?

Also, if you're going to say that recovery supposedly lost Bitcoin — as is termed — violates Bitcoin's core values, why the hell would you at the same time advocate for literally burning people's assets in their damn wallets simply because you fear that Quantum computers can access them and dump on the market?

That action doesn't violate Bitcoin's core values?

I think it's quite pathetic that we are flirting with ideas that will completely alter everything this ecosystem has been about. There's absolutely no justifiable reasons to burn people's coins simply because their addresses are inactive, that just makes the entire ecosystem seem like a joke after all that it's been marketed for.

Imagine you invested in Bitcoin and completely went off of any digital existence and instead of the Bitcoin community to maintain developments that keeps your assets safe even in your absence, they dream of ways to essentially fuck you over to save their own portfolio from breeding as they fail to ensure the security of the chain.

Believe it or not, most so-called Bitcoin supporters just love the idea of Bitcoin's price going up, they don't give a shit about anything else.