Q Day is coming and Bitcoin wallets have zero protection. Let's build Hardfork

[NatureBOB]

Bitcoin wallets are not resistant to Quantum computers at all.
They have no shield to protect their transactions and funds.

We should build for live test minet SHA PoW blockchain with built in sheald  defenses in wallet to protect transactions and wallets against unlimited computing power and against Q day.
Such a hardfork should be developed over a few years so Bitcoin developers can pick the best solutions from it and implement them to protect BTC wallets.

What do you think about this?

[hd49728]

Bitcoin wallets are not resistant to Quantum computers at all.
They have no shield to protect their transactions and funds.

We should build for live test minet SHA PoW blockchain with built in sheald  defenses in wallet to protect transactions and wallets against unlimited computing power and against Q day.
Such a hardfork should be developed over a few years so Bitcoin developers can pick the best solutions from it and implement them to protect BTC wallets.

Developers are working on it and they actually don't wait for your idea to do that but it is not easy technically and operationally. Fortunately, it can be more easily to have consensus because if Quantum computers become truly dangerous threats, Bitcoin community will agree with each other quickly at that time if solution is available. They will be less separating like with Segwit activation years ago.

Quantum attack game theory.
Against Allowing Quantum Recovery of Bitcoin.
J. Lopp's Post-Quantum Migration BIP.
https://wickedsmartbitcoin.com/bip110_signaling
https://jlopp.github.io/knotzi-death-march/

I doubt it'll be as bad as SegWit activation. But it definitely won't be as smooth as Taproot activation, because deciding which cryptography to use isn't straightforward with various trade-off such as size, verification time and it's security audit result.

The table is outdated and missing some alternatives (such as SHRMPS and SHRINCS), but it's enough to show there's no single "best" choice.

[NatureBOB]

Copy and pasting the standard reading list doesn't address the core problem.

Relying on NIST and NSA post quantum candidates is a dead end for a real blockchain.
Their proposed signature carry massive key and signature sizez so  If so called Bitcoin developers if they have ego and od they strictly follow that NSA NISt rulles then they will never build anything functionally it will simply clog Bitcoin blockchain.

Reading theory and academic PDFs is quite different from doing perform on a live high load PoW network.
Paper trade offs look fine in research papers.but true security and scalability must be roven in the Real minet under real economic pressure.

If you are a Bitcoin developer and have such a huge ego then  there is no way you will understand why a separate hardfork is needed.
I always avoided this forum because I considered it a niche place in the cybersecurity world.
And Yes I have been mining Bitcoin since the end of the second year and Im just ask a simple question here

Do you have a working plan and can you actually build it ?
Or are we stuck here in the stone age where normal talk just turns toxic.

IMPORTANT!
Why do you all blindly trust intelligence agencies lika NSA and their standards.
They design key sizes and cryptographic standards for government streaming communications systems like those for communication between the Pentagon White House or Kremlin
Sucha massive signatures and keys work ok but for centralized systems that do not care about any bandwidth limits and those government systems do not pay for every single byte of data and they do not have to worry about node storage limits or hard drive space

Decentralized blockchain is different universe so forcing heavy government grade signatures into a public ledger completely destroys the mempool and it will give disaster so Stop treating f.. state intelligence guidelines as bible for P2P networks

The real blockchain solution requires lightweight cryptographic proofs that protect layer and its not have ... Must be instead of copying tools made for state communication. It is Naive to trust intelligence agencies and accept their recommendations when their only interest is Not to create and implement decentralized monetary systems and when their real goal is the control and manipulation of societies.