The Next Bitcoin Fork? Quantum Threats & Dev Conflicts Explained
Published: 2025-05-16
Status:
Available
|
Analyzed
Published: 2025-05-16
Status:
Available
|
Analyzed
Predictions from this Video
Incorrect: 0
Prediction
Topic
Status
Bitcoin Core developers plan to remove the 80-byte limit on the OP_RETURN function, allowing for more data to be attached to transactions.
"this bit of code is the op return function which allows users to attach up to 80 bytes of arbitrary data to a Bitcoin transaction... the upcoming update to Bitcoin Core will remove this 80 byt limit which effectively adds more functionality to the Bitcoin blockchain"
Pending
The OP_RETURN cap removal is proceeding without full developer consensus or a formal community process.
"this update is going ahead without the unanimous support of Bitcoin Core developers... this change is being implemented without a proper community consensus process"
Pending
Concerns exist that removing the OP_RETURN cap could lead to the Bitcoin blockchain being bloated with spam data.
"many Bitcoiners do not agree with this change that's because while removing this cap could add extra functionality to Bitcoin many people believe that Bitcoin could also become a data dump flooded with useless spam files that potentially bloat the network"
Pending
The removal of the OP_RETURN cap is a network policy change, not a consensus rule change, and thus does not require community-wide agreement.
"removing the OP return function doesn't actually require consensus and that's simply because it's a standardness rule and not a consensus rule"
Pending
The historical block size debate led to the SegWit upgrade and the subsequent hard fork creating Bitcoin Cash.
"the block size debate came back to the four in 2015 when the segregated witness update or SegWit was released... after years of debate SegWit was activated in 2017 and those who didn't support it forked the Bitcoin blockchain creating Bitcoin Cash"
Pending
The current disagreement between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Knots is a policy-level issue, not a consensus disagreement, making a fork unlikely.
"the disagreement between the two clients is at a policy level which is to all intents and purposes a much smaller deal than a full-blown consensus disagreement both clients are happy to validate the same blockchain making a fork therefore unlikely to happen"
Pending
Past Bitcoin forks suggest that any future hard fork would likely fail to gain significant adoption.
"we should also address the elephant in the room and that's all the other Bitcoin forks it may sound harsh but the reality is that these forks proved that a hard fork of Bitcoin would most likely fail"
Pending
Implementing a hard fork for quantum resistance at this time would be counterproductive and harmful.
"as such rushing into a hard fork at this stage would probably do more harm than good making such a move counterproductive"
Pending
The speaker predicts that Bitcoin will continue to operate as it always has, implying no significant forks are imminent.
"from where we're sitting Bitcoin will continue to plot along in the same way it always has"
Pending
The current controversies surrounding Bitcoin are being exaggerated by media and certain community members.
"this drama has become overblown by crypto media outlets and Bitcoin maxis spreading doomsday level FUD on X"
Pending
Quantum computers could theoretically crack encryption in minutes or seconds, but this capability is currently theoretical.
"a quantum computer could theoretically do this in minutes possibly even seconds scary stuff the key word there though is theoretically"
Pending
Cracking internet encryption requires 4,000 logical qubits, while cracking Bitcoin's SHA256 encryption requires 8,000 logical qubits.
"a quantum computer would require 4,000 logical cubits to crack the RSA 2048 encryption used on the internet and would require 8,000 logical cubits to crack Bitcoin's SHA 256 encryption"
Pending
Approximately 3.8 million BTC lost in old wallets could be vulnerable to theft by quantum computers, potentially crashing the market.
"millions of BTC have been lost or rendered otherwise inaccessible around 3.8 million BTC to be exact as such even if Bitcoin's encryption was increased the BTC lost on old hard drives and wallets couldn't be made quantum resistant this means that all 3.8 million BTC could theoretically be stolen by quantum computers and dumped on the open market"
Pending
Proposals exist for a hard fork to migrate BTC from legacy wallets to post-quantum cryptography-secured wallets to address quantum threats.
"a number of proposals have been put forward to increase Bitcoin's quantum resistance for example one proposal involves a hard fork that enforces a network-wide migration of BTC from legacy wallets to ones secured by postquantum cryptography"
Pending
A likely hard fork for quantum resistance would result in two versions of Bitcoin: one quantum-resistant and one not.
"the most likely hard fork would involve upgrading Bitcoin to become quantum proof at a fundamental level but as we saw earlier this would result in two versions of Bitcoin one that's quantum resistant and one that's not"
Pending
A fork could potentially reclaim lost BTC but would fundamentally alter Bitcoin's core principles, potentially making it akin to fiat currency.
"the new clear option is that Bitcoin forks in a different way making it possible to reclaim or delete this lost BTC from the supply however aside from the risk of removing BTC that wasn't lost this would completely destroy the ideologies that Bitcoin was built on"
Pending
A Bitcoin fork in the near future is considered highly unlikely due to a lack of compelling reasons for such a split.
"will Bitcoin see a fork in the near future well from our perspective this seems incredibly unlikely in case it wasn't already obvious by this point in the video there doesn't seem to be much of a reason for this split to take place"
Pending
Removing the OP_RETURN cap will not significantly impact Bitcoin's future, as users are already employing alternative methods for storing data exceeding the 80-byte limit.
"removing the OP return cap won't make much of a difference to the future of Bitcoin and this is for multiple reasons but primarily because people are already using alternative methods to store data on the Bitcoin network that exceeds the 80 byt limit"
Pending
Alternative workarounds for data storage on Bitcoin are significantly cheaper than using OP_RETURN, making widespread adoption of the updated protocol for data storage unlikely due to cost.
"workarounds like slipstream are 4x cheaper than using OP return and this means that even with the cap being removed there won't be many users adding data in this way it simply wouldn't make sense from a financial perspective"
Pending
A hard fork due to quantum computing threats is unlikely because current quantum technology is far from being able to crack Bitcoin's SHA256 encryption.
"a hard fork is unlikely simply because quantum computing is still a long way from cracking Bitcoin SH 256 encryption"
Pending