Trading volume is a good perspective to view this through, actually. If an attacker decides to consolidate immediately, they could do so within just a couple hours and suppress the Bitcoin price for a long time.
> 1.7 million Bitcoin represents possibly about 1 week of global trading volumes. Even assuming it is 1-2 months of trading volumes, the market can absorb.
Hourglass spreads that 1 week of trading volume over a minimum of 8 months, possibly more.
> Trying to manage the Bitcoin price via spending restrictions is a terrible idea.
While I generally agree with this sentence, I think P2PK coins are an exceptional case.
> In any case, the Bitcoin price routinely drops by upwards of 85%. It is not a security concern. Price volatility is not a security.
Price volatility absolutely impacts security, and this would be an unprecedented event. We also haven't seen an 85% price drop in a long time.
Concept NACK.
1.7 million Bitcoin represents possibly about 1 week of global trading volumes. Even assuming it is 1-2 months of trading volumes, the market can absorb.
Trying to manage the Bitcoin price via spending restrictions is a terrible idea.
In any case, the Bitcoin price routinely drops by upwards of 85%. It is not a security concern. Price volatility is not a security.On Tuesday, April 29, 2025 at 5:08:16 PM UTC-6 Hunter Beast wrote:This is a proposal to mitigate against potential mass liquidation of P2PK funds. The specification is pretty simple, but the motivation and justification for it is a bit longer.Feedback welcome!