Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Cardano’s Hoskinson says Bitcoin’s quantum fix can’t save Satoshi Nakamoto’s BTC

Published

on

Cardano's Hoskinson says Bitcoin's quantum fix can't save Satoshi Nakamoto's BTC

Bitcoin’s core developers earlier this week proposed freezing 8 million coins to defend against quantum attackers.

But Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson believes it still can’t save coins belonging to the network’s pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto, per a video posted to his YouTube channel late Wednesday.

Hoskinson said Bitcoin’s proposed defense against quantum computers is both technically mislabeled and structurally incapable of protecting the network’s oldest coins, including the roughly 1 million bitcoin attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto.

He argued that BIP-361, the proposal from developer Jameson Lopp and others to phase out quantum-vulnerable bitcoin addresses, is being presented as a soft fork but would functionally require a hard fork because it invalidates existing signature schemes that users are actively relying on.

Advertisement

“To actually do this, you need a hard fork,” Hoskinson said. The distinction matters because Bitcoin’s development culture has historically opposed hard forks, viewing them as violations of the network’s immutability. BIP-361 authors have described the proposal as a soft fork, a characterization Hoskinson called a lie.

A soft fork tightens the rules so old software still works but can’t use the new features. A hard fork changes the rules so fundamentally that old software stops working entirely and the network splits unless everyone upgrades.

BIP-361 suggests that users with frozen quantum-vulnerable funds could reclaim them by constructing a zero-knowledge proof tied to their BIP-39 seed phrase, a standard for generating wallet keys from a recoverable phrase.

Hoskinson argued this approach cannot rescue approximately 1.7 million bitcoin that predate BIP-39’s introduction in 2013, including the roughly 1 million coins associated with Satoshi’s early mining activity.

Advertisement

Those early coins were generated using a different key derivation method from the original Bitcoin wallet software, which relied on a local key pool rather than a deterministic seed.

There is no seed phrase to prove knowledge of, which means no zero-knowledge recovery scheme built on that assumption can return access to the holders.

“1.7 million coins can’t do that. It’s not possible. 1.1 million of which belong to Satoshi,” Hoskinson said.

If the proposal passes in its current form, those coins would remain permanently frozen regardless of whether their original owners ever attempt to migrate, because migration would require cryptographic proof they are unable to provide.

Jameson Lopp, the core developer who co-authored BIP-361, acknowledged in a post on X this week that he does not like the proposal and hopes it never needs to be adopted, describing it as “a rough idea for a contingency plan” rather than a finalized specification.

Advertisement

Lopp has argued that freezing dormant coins, which he estimates at 5.6 million bitcoin, would be preferable to allowing a future quantum attacker to recover and dump them on the market.

Hoskinson’s broader critique extends beyond the technical details. He argues that Bitcoin’s lack of formal on-chain governance leaves the network unable to resolve these tradeoffs through a structured process, forcing contentious upgrades to be negotiated through developer mailing lists and social pressure.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

With No Bipartisan Leadership, CFTC ‘Won’t Slow Down‘ on Rulemaking

Published

on

Government, CFTC, United States, Commodities Investment, Prediction Markets

The chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Michael Selig, said he would not wait for the appointment of additional commissioners to lead the regulatory agency before moving ahead on rulemaking potentially related to digital assets and prediction markets.

In a Thursday hearing of the House Agriculture Committee, Selig responded to questions from ranking member Angie Craig, who called out the lack of leadership at the CFTC, which normally has a bipartisan panel of five commissioners. The Minnesota representative asked the chair to commit to not finalizing regulations while he is the only commissioner.

“In the interim, we cannot, for the sake of the American people, slow down in our rulemaking,” said Selig. “It’s very important that we get investor protections, consumer protections and safeguards for our markets. And so, I cannot, unfortunately, commit to not do my job that I was appointed to do by the president.”

Government, CFTC, United States, Commodities Investment, Prediction Markets
CFTC Chair Michael Selig speaking on Thursday. Source: US House Committee on Agriculture

Selig, who has served as the CFTC’s sole commissioner and chair since December, has come under scrutiny from many lawmakers for unilaterally leading the agency on rules favoring crypto and prediction markets with no bipartisan group of commissioners. As of Thursday, President Donald Trump had not publicly announced any nominations to staff the agency nor signaled he intended to do so.

“We’re going to do more through rulemaking,” said Selig in response to a question on the CFTC’s leadership from Representative Don Davis. “We can’t have the staff deciding on discretion what the rules are.”

Advertisement

Related: CFTC probes oil futures trades tied to Trump’s moves in Iran: Report

The CFTC chair proposed rulemaking in March that could amend or issue new regulations over event contracts on prediction markets. Selig has been outspoken about claiming that the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets as the companies behind some platforms face state-level lawsuits related to sports betting laws and proposed legislation to crack down on insider trading.

CFTC’s legal fight over prediction market continues

Gaming authorities in several US states have filed lawsuits against prediction market companies like Kalshi and Polymarket, alleging the platforms offered sports betting in violation of state laws.

Advertisement

New Mexico Representative Gabe Vasquez questioned Selig at Thursday’s hearing with a visual aid showing that bets on event contracts and through state-level gaming “aren’t much of a difference, yet they are regulated completely differently.” He accused the CFTC of using “loopholes” to bypass state laws and requirements for prediction markets, causing some jurisdictions to miss out on revenue.

“The CFTC was not created or intended to regulate sports gambling,” said Vasquez, adding:

“Are we regulating real economic risk, or are we allowing prediction markets to steal billions of dollars in an unregulated free-for-all, with no consumer protection as Congress and the CFTC turns a blind eye?”

Companies like Kalshi have argued that they are under the sole jurisdiction of the CFTC. This argument led the company to court wins in Arizona and New Jersey, where this month judges blocked state officials from taking action against Kalshi.

Magazine: Should users be allowed to bet on war and death in prediction markets?

Advertisement