> "the end of Bitcoin" No, exposed keys are the real risk, not some instant protocol death.

The scary part isnt the quantum fairy tale, its that Bitcoin has a giant pile of old outputs sitting there forever and people keep talking as if a migration checklist makes that easy. Getting everyone off reused or long-lived keys in a live system is the ugly bit, not the headline math, and the article seems a little too pleased with itself about that.

The migration checklist part is where this stops being a physics story and turns into an incentives story, because every wallet that has ever reused addresses now has a very awkward upgrade path and a support burden nobody budgets for. If this keeps getting framed as “just move coins,” the people who sell custody and cold storage are going to be forced into a de facto standard for address hygiene, whether Bitcoin likes it or not.