量子计算机会构成很大的困境。如何处理Nakamoto的Satoshi的比特币和其他数百万BTC？

比特币开发商Agustin Cruz提出了一个坚硬的分叉，该叉子将迫使所有人转移其BTC以解决对量子攻击的抵抗力。

The quantum computer will pose a big dilemma. What to do with Satoshi Nakamoto’s bitcoins and other millions of lost BTC?

量子计算机会构成很大的困境。如何处理Nakamoto的Satoshi的比特币和其他数百万BTC？

Bitcoin and the quantum threat

比特币和量子威胁

Bitcoin developer Agustin Cruz proposes a hard fork that would force everyone to transfer their BTC to addresses resistant to quantum attacks.

比特币开发商Agustin Cruz提出了一个坚硬的分叉，该叉子将迫使所有人转移其BTC以解决对量子攻击的抵抗力。

His BIP suggests a mandatory migration period from current Bitcoin addresses (i.e., addresses secured by ECDSA) to addresses resistant to quantum computers. After a certain date, bitcoins that have not moved will become unrecoverable.

他的BIP表明，从当前的比特币地址（即，ECDSA保护的地址）进行了强制性迁移期，以解决对量子计算机的抵抗力。在一定日期之后，未移动的比特币将无法恢复。

Before addressing the philosophical and technical questions raised by this BIP, let’s emphasize that the quantum threat is not a fantasy.

在解决这个BIP提出的哲学和技术问题之前，让我们强调量子威胁不是幻想。

For Microsoft, the quantum computer will be a reality within several “years, not decades”. Google and IBM also predict that the major technological breakthrough is closer than many think.

对于微软而言，量子计算机将在“几年，而不是几十年”之内成为现实。 Google和IBM还预测，主要的技术突破比许多人想象的要近。

Scott Aaronson, a researcher with 25 years of experience in quantum computing, recently sounded the alarm:

拥有25年量子计算经验的研究人员斯科特·亚伦森（Scott Aaronson）最近发出了警报：

I had until now been used to saying that we might, eventually, consider the necessity to migrate from elliptic curve cryptography to cryptographic systems plausibly resistant to a quantum attack. I think today the message must be: yes, clearly, worry. Have a plan.

到目前为止，我一直被用来说我们最终认为有必要从椭圆曲线密码学迁移到密码系统，从而可能抵抗量子攻击。我认为今天的信息必须是：是的，显然，担心。有一个计划。

Pierre-Luc Dallaire-Demers, a researcher at the University of Calgary, estimates that “there are about five years left before a quantum computer can break the elliptic curve keys that secure bitcoins”.

卡尔加里大学的研究人员Pierre-Luc Dallae-Demers估计：“量子计算机还剩五年，量子计算机可以打破椭圆曲线键的键。”

It is therefore time to revive the debate.

因此，是时候复兴辩论了。

The dilemma…

困境…

Should we prevent Google or Microsoft from taking control of bitcoins that have not migrated to resistant addresses? That is, the million bitcoins mined by Satoshi Nakamoto and the other two million BTC estimated to be lost?

我们是否应该防止Google或Microsoft控制尚未迁移到抵抗地址的比特币？也就是说，由萨托岛纳卡本（Satoshi Nakamoto）开采的百万比特币和其他200万BTC估计会丢失？

Jameson Lopp published a long article on his blog discussing the pros and cons. The cypherpunk agrees with Agustin Cruz and recommends destroying BTC vulnerable to quantum computers. Here is his latest talk on the subject:

詹姆森·洛普（Jameson Lopp）在他的博客上发表了一篇长篇文章，讨论了利弊。 Cypherpunk与Agustin Cruz一致，并建议破坏BTC容易受到量子计算机的影响。这是他关于这个主题的最新演讲：

Pieter Wuille, the most experienced Bitcoin developer (25 BIPs), is on the same wavelength:

Pieter Wuille是最有经验的比特币开发人员（25 BIP），处于相同的波长：

Of course bitcoins should be destroyed. If and when (and it’s a big if) the existence of a quantum computer capable of breaking cryptography becomes a credible threat, we will have no choice but to remove the ability to spend bitcoins secured by ECDSA cryptography. Otherwise, millions of BTC become vulnerable to theft. I don’t see how any currency can maintain any value in such a context. And this affects everyone, even those who have moved their bitcoins to resistant addresses [because this theft could lower the bitcoin price].

当然，比特币应该被销毁。如果以及何时（如果是很大），能够破坏密码学的量子计算机的存在成为一个可信的威胁，我们别无选择，只能消除花费ECDSA加密保护的比特币的能力。否则，数以百万计的BTC很容易受到盗窃的影响。我看不出任何货币在这种情况下如何保持任何价值。这会影响每个人，甚至那些将比特币转移到抵抗地址的人（因为此盗窃可能会降低比特币价格）。

Others, like the CEO of Tether, do not seem overly worried:

其他人，例如Tether的首席执行官，似乎并不过于担心：

Resistant addresses will be added to Bitcoin before the quantum threat becomes serious. Everyone alive (and with access to their wallets) will transfer their bitcoins to this new type of address. All lost bitcoins, including those of Satoshi (if he is no longer alive), will be hacked and put back into circulation.

在量子威胁变得严重之前，耐药地址将被添加到比特币中。每个人都活着（并可以使用钱包）将其比特币转移到这种新型地址。所有丢失的比特币，包括Satoshi的比特币（如果他不再活着），都将被黑客入侵并恢复流通。

Did Satoshi Nakamoto want Microsoft to get hold of his bitcoins? Unlikely.

萨托·纳卡本（Satoshi Nakamoto）是否希望微软掌握他的比特币？不太可能。

Incentive

激励

Some point out that destroying bitcoins would deny the network’s foundations. First: resistance to censorship. No one should be able to deprive others of their bitcoins. Not to mention the sacred tradition of evolving the code through backward-compatible soft forks.

有人指出，破坏比特币将否认网络的基础。第一：抵抗审查制度。没有人应该能够剥夺他人的比特币。更不用说通过向后兼容的柔软的叉子发展代码的神圣传统。

On the other hand, we would prevent several million bitcoins from falling into the hands of multinationals. Knowing that Microsoft recently refused to add bitcoin to its treasury.

另一方面，我们将防止数百万个比特币落入跨国公司的手中。知道微软最近拒绝在其财政部增加比特币。

Satoshi’s BTC are worth about 100 billion dollars. Those suspected to be lost forever are worth 250 billion. That’s a significant pot that Microsoft could pour into the markets.

Satoshi的BTC价值约1000亿美元。那些涉嫌永远损失的人价值2500亿。这是微软可以倒入市场的重要锅。

These 350 billion could easily represent more than 2,000 billion when the quantum computer is fully operational. That’s more than Google’s market capitalization.

当量子计算机完全运行时，这3000亿亿可以很容易地代表超过2000亿。这不仅仅是Google的市值。

This leads us to another cornerstone of the Bitcoin matrix: financial incentive. The 21M BTC limit exists because we are financially incentivized not to change it. [It is with this argument that Bitcoin Core refused to filter ordinals, which are a source of income for miners].

这使我们进入了比特币矩阵的另一个基石：财务激励。存在2100万BTC限制，因为我们在经济上激励了不改变它。 [正是通过这一论点，比特币核心拒绝过滤序，这是矿工的收入来源]。

Similarly, we are all incentivized that lost bitcoins, including those of Satoshi, never come back into circulation. Letting Microsoft sell millions of BTC impoverishes all bitcoin holders. Conversely, preventing Microsoft from accessing lost funds would worsen no one’s situation.

同样，我们都在激励我们失去的比特币，包括萨托西的比特币，再也不会流通了。让微软出售数百万BTC的所有比特币持有人。相反，防止微软获得损失的资金不会加剧任何人的情况。

“No one”, or almost no one. Some absent-minded people will lose out, but whether by a hard fork or by the quantum computer, the result will be the same.

“没有人”，或者几乎没有人。一些缺乏的人会输掉，但是无论是用硬叉还是通过量子计算机，结果都是相同的。

At the heart of Bitcoin cryptography

比特币密码学的核心

Now let’s get into the heart of the cryptographic matter. Bitcoin relies on hashing functions (SHA-256), but also on asymmetric cryptography. In the second case, it is also called “public key” cryptography. It is at the heart of transaction mechanics and would be vulnerable to a quantum computer.

现在，让我们进入加密问题的核心。比特币依赖于哈希功能（SHA-256），也依赖于非对称加密术。在第二种情况下，它也称为“公共密钥”密码学。它是交易机制的核心，很容易受到量子计算机的影响。

The private/public key pairs to which BTCs are linked are constructed using the secp256k1 elliptic curve (ECDSA). It is these

使用SECP256K1椭圆曲线（ECDSA）构建了与BTC链接到的私有/公共密钥对。就是这些