I was surprised to see this :
What does this really mean?
From what I understand, whoever paid to put that on there is worried about Bitcoin being attacked by a quantum computer of sorts, or somehow the encryption being cracked by 2030, and then it being too late to transition (does he mean to hardfork?) into another algo which is safe from whatever exploit it's discovered.
Is this the case? wouldn't there be an agreement on that at least? I mean what would be the opposite? whoever is not on board would be a direct enemy of Bitcoin. I can only see controversy in what algo to switch to in particular, and while people fight to use this or that other algo, Bitcoin would get attacked.
