Good article with some questionable remarks like

> Q: Stealing is illegal, so why would anyone use a CRQC to steal Bitcoin?

> A: If you truly believe this, you really should value Bitcoin at 0 – it has many unnecessary components with a lot of overhead, like proof-of-work and digital signatures.

Proof of work is still necessary for two reasons:

1) to fairly distribute all coins (it's not sufficient though, e.g. Bitcoin's halvings still concentrate wealth on early miners/adopters)

2) to provide objective proof for the true transaction history, anchored in energy expenditure.

A related article on Bitcoin Core resistance to upgrading: https://murmurationstwo.substack.com/p/bitcoin-developers-ar...

I guess the argument goes more like: If nobody were to attempt to steal anything, you don’t need security for your ledger anyway.

> 2) to provide objective proof for the true transaction history, anchored in energy expenditure.

Why do you need this if you are willing to trust other people not to steal coins or lie?

> 1) to fairly distribute all coins

Same question as above. If you don't care about perfidy, simply use the honor system for coin distribution.

If you do care about perfidy, then you should probably care about people breaking the law to steal your coins.