Early Cypherpunk Adam Back, mentioned by Satoshi Nakamoto on the white role of Bitcoin, suggested that the computing pressure pressure was likely to reveal if the pseudonymous creator of the blockchain was alive.
In an interview after a Q&A session at the “Satoshi Spritz” event in Turin on April 18, Back suggested that the quantity of computing could force Nakamoto to move their bitcoin (Btc). That’s because, according to Back, Bitcoin holders will be forced to move their assets to the new, signature-based addresses that are resistant to the whole.
Back said the current Computer quantities do not place a capti -believable threat In Bitcoin’s cryptography, but it will probably threaten the future. The back estimates that computers volume can be dangerous in “maybe twenty years.”
Related: Bitcoin’s Quantum-Resistant Hard Fork is inevitable — this is the only chance to fix node incentives
When the threat becomes real, the back says that the Bitcoin community has to choose between removal of old, weak addresses or let those funds have been stolen:
“If here are the volume computers, and people at universities and research labs have access, the network has the option to let people steal them or to let them out – to delete the signature.”
Back expects the community to join the previous choice, forcing the Pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin to transfer their funds if they want to avoid losing it.
Privacy upgrades can complicated proof
However, Back said that if such a situation would reveal if Satoshi Nakamoto Life also depends on Bitcoin’s future privacy features.
“It depends a little on the technology, there are some research ideas that can add privacy to bitcoin,” Back said. “So, maybe there can be a way to fix volume issues while maintaining privacy.”
Related: The lawyer accused US Homeland to proverb who should be Satoshi Nakamoto Meeting
However, not everyone is convinced that – Privacy Enhancements – the scenario will reveal whether Nakamoto is alive. An unidentified early bitcoin miner and a member of the Bitcoin community told Cointelegraph that he did not expect to move Nakamoto’s coins:
“Even though he was alive and holding private keys, I didn’t think he would move it. Based on how he acted to this day I would rather let the community decide.”
He added that, because it is a controversial choice, it makes sense for the community to decide. He said he would be surprised if Nakamoto came out of the woodwork today to move the owners.
A quantum-resistant bitcoin
Back explained that most volume -resistant implementations are either unchanged in terms of security or very expensive from a data outlook. He mentioned Lamport Signatures as an old and proven design, but taught that they weigh ten -ten kilobytes.
As such, he suggested that Bitcoin should be prepared to switch to signatures that are resistant to the whole but only do it if necessary. He suggests an implementation based on Bitcoin Taproot that allows addresses to move to signatures that are resistant to the whole if necessary.
Magazine: Bitcoin vs. computer volume threat: timeline and solution (2025–2035)
