| ▲ | memnips 13 hours ago | |||||||
Somewhat ironic question, but as ETFs holdings of BTC continue to grow, is there a possibility that the custodians of those ETFs start to have a backup plan for ETF holders or create an alliance to push a fork forward? The management fee those companies generate is non-trivial, so they're incentivized to stay ahead of this. Now, of course, the irony here would be traditional finance infrastructure winning out over decentralized, which could definitely deal a psychological blow to BTC's perceived value... but it's something I've been thinking about lately as this existential threat rises on the horizon. | ||||||||
| ▲ | dodobirdlord 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
In the absolute disaster scenario where the ecosystem is taken by surprise by an adversary with a CRQC, regulated custodians could form a consortium to reconstitute a new quantum-resistant version of bitcoin, pooling their ownership ledgers from before the disaster to reinitialize the blockchain and consigning to oblivion all coins not held in custody. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | wmf 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
Yes, if you read the fine print on the ETFs they tell you what they will do in case of a fork. Usually their custodian picks the "winning" chain at their discretion. There's a similar (although reversed) situation with stablecoins. | ||||||||
| ▲ | pants2 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Microstrategy is already pushing/funding quantum resilience for Bitcoin, so yes! | ||||||||