Top cryptographers are divided on how to address Bitcoin's vulnerability to future quantum computing threats. The core issue revolves around the potential risk posed by unmoved coins, many of which are believed to belong to Bitcoin's pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto or are lost due to forgotten keys. Some experts advocate for a hard deadline to transition from current signature schemes, ECDSA and Schnorr, to quantum-resistant alternatives, arguing that leaving these coins vulnerable could allow a future attacker to destabilize the market. Opponents of this approach argue that enforcing such a deadline would amount to confiscation, violating Bitcoin's foundational principle of absolute property rights. They caution that this could set a dangerous precedent for future government interventions. Various proposals have emerged, including Hourglass, which limits the number of vulnerable coins that can be spent per block, and BIP-361, which allows migrated holders to prove ownership with quantum-resistant proofs. Another proposal, PACTs, suggests a method for owners to timestamp a private claim now and move funds later without revealing their keys.