From: Alex <alexhultman@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Hourglass V2 Update
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2026 19:26:01 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e9b8eac7-0f68-49fc-9301-2be2c3a419b0n@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d8a38970-952d-4c8c-9ba5-2dfd79e70147n@googlegroups.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4982 bytes --]
> Bitcoin should not have an in-protocol plunge protection mechanism, and
certainly not one that artificially restricts people's ability to spend
their coins. I encourage you to withdraw this proposal, for the sake of
bitcoin's integrity and utility as a p2p electronic cash system.
The (time) limit is only applicable to legacy P2PK addresses. Anyone can
move their funds to modern SegWit/Taproot addresses and continue without
any such limit. You are free to insist on using legacy P2PK addresses as
you wish, freely, but doing so would put a spending (time) limit much like
current banking KYC limits. Again, insisting on keeping your BTC in
specifically legacy P2PK addresses would lead to this (time) limit. All
other addresses are unaffected.
onsdag 18 februari 2026 kl. 16:20:15 UTC+1 skrev Mike Casey:
> Admittedly, the actual value is arbitrary, but it's very easy to relay
> conceptually which helps communicate the concept and dissuade this
> particular branch of quantum FUD. Fundamentally, it's a trade off between
> how quickly the entire set can be liquidated (if keys are cracked in
> advance) and how long and individual original keyholder has to wait to be
> able to exercise dominion over their P2PK coins. In addition to memetics,
> the 1 BTC amount should provide a very lengthy liquidation period assuming
> most P2PK keys are lost and cannot be moved prior to implementation.
> On Monday, February 16, 2026 at 5:11:09 PM UTC-5 Jameson Lopp wrote:
>
>> Bitcoin is ultimately a system of rules that are enforced by those who
>> use the system and hold the keys to spend UTXOs. As such, if a sufficiently
>> large cohort of economic power within the system is interested in
>> protecting itself against massive liquidation events from malicious actors
>> who arguably are not the rightful owners of UTXOs, the incentives are in
>> place for them to do something about it.
>>
>> I like Hourglass V2 a lot more than V1. My primary complaint is that 1
>> BTC per block is somewhat arbitrary. It would be interesting to point to
>> the on-chain statistics of what P2PK UTXO spend volume we have seen in
>> recent years.
>>
>> Additionally, in the context of my own migration BIP, Hourglass V2 could
>> be complementary to the concept of offering a ZK quantum safe spending
>> option for folks who fail to migrate UTXOs to quantum safe scripts before a
>> set deadline, given that these old P2PK outputs do not belong to HD wallets
>> and thus the owners would be incapable of constructing a ZK proof of HD
>> wallet ownership.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 5:12 PM Light <bitco...@lightco.in> wrote:
>>
>>> Bitcoin should not have an in-protocol plunge protection mechanism, and
>>> certainly not one that artificially restricts people's ability to spend
>>> their coins. I encourage you to withdraw this proposal, for the sake of
>>> bitcoin's integrity and utility as a p2p electronic cash system.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026, at 3:47 PM, Mike Casey wrote:
>>> > In response to feedback, the Hourglass proposal to mitigate against
>>> > potential mass liquidation of P2PK funds has been enhanced to further
>>> > limit spend amounts from such outputs to only 1 bitcoin per block.
>>> >
>>> https://github.com/cryptoquick/bips/blob/hourglass-v2/bip-hourglass-v2.mediawiki
>>> >
>>> > Prior discussion of the original Hourglass proposal:
>>> > https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/zmg3U117aNc/m/lDCMs9j7EAAJ
>>> >
>>> > Thoughts & feedback welcome!
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> > Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> > an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
>>> > To view this discussion visit
>>> >
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/9336f5a4-5c28-4c1b-af29-a8462b7a9377n%40googlegroups.com
>>> > <
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/9336f5a4-5c28-4c1b-af29-a8462b7a9377n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
>>> >.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>
>> To view this discussion visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/57bd09bc-1c1b-4605-82f9-65b6b61cf8a2%40app.fastmail.com
>>> .
>>>
>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/e9b8eac7-0f68-49fc-9301-2be2c3a419b0n%40googlegroups.com.
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 8096 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-19 7:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-10 20:47 Mike Casey
2026-02-13 22:06 ` Light
2026-02-16 22:03 ` Jameson Lopp
2026-02-17 0:31 ` Light
2026-02-17 13:02 ` Garlo Nicon
2026-02-17 13:24 ` Isabel Foxen Duke
2026-02-23 18:47 ` Isabel Foxen Duke
2026-02-25 14:39 ` Bob Burnett
2026-02-25 16:46 ` Jameson Lopp
2026-02-18 14:33 ` Mike Casey
2026-02-19 3:26 ` Alex [this message]
2026-02-21 6:22 ` neonrooks
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e9b8eac7-0f68-49fc-9301-2be2c3a419b0n@googlegroups.com \
--to=alexhultman@gmail.com \
--cc=bitcoindev@googlegroups.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox