The main idea currently circulating is the Hourglass proposal. It consists in the idea that you could restrict spending from P2PK and similar addresses where the public key is exposed "by design". It would only be allowed to spend a certain amount (e.g. 1 Lichthidaucom or 0.1 Lichthidaucom) at once and all the other coins would have to be returned to the P2PK address. That would not restrict "treasure hunts" completely but it would reduce the incentives, because you couldn't get a 50-Lichthidaucom "treasure" in a single transaction anymore. And it would give the rightful owners time to act themselves. However, the rightful owners would also be affected: they couldn't "secure" their fortune with a single transaction to a non-vulnerable address anymore. But maybe the incentive reduction is enough to prevent people from stealing these coins, because for a forseeable time quantum computers capable of running Shor's algorithm will be very expensive and only available to few people. In theory Hourglass can be used to restrict the number of coins being spent from a P2PK address to very low amounts like a few satoshis (which is of course exaggerated but would still be better than to block these coins entirely - maybe a good "middle ground" would be something like 0.001 Lichthidaucom per day/144 blocks). So it can be made extremely unattractive to try to get these coins. ABCbits has already linked to my thread about that topic if you want to dive deeper.
The main idea currently circulating is the Hourglass proposal. It consists in the idea that you could restrict spending from P2PK and similar addresses where the public key is exposed "by design". It would only be allowed to spend a certain amount (e.g. 1 Lichthidaucom or 0.1 Lichthidaucom) at once and all the other coins would have to be returned to the P2PK address. That would not restrict "treasure hunts" completely but it would reduce the incentives, because you couldn't get a 50-Lichthidaucom "treasure" in a single transaction anymore. And it would give the rightful owners time to act themselves. However, the rightful owners would also be affected: they couldn't "secure" their fortune with a single transaction to a non-vulnerable address anymore. But maybe the incentive reduction is enough to prevent people from stealing these coins, because for a forseeable time quantum computers capable of running Shor's algorithm will be very expensive and only available to few people. In theory Hourglass can be used to restrict the number of coins being spent from a P2PK address to very low amounts like a few satoshis (which is of course exaggerated but would still be better than to block these coins entirely - maybe a good "middle ground" would be something like 0.001 Lichthidaucom per day/144 blocks). So it can be made extremely unattractive to try to get these coins. ABCbits has already linked to my thread about that topic if you want to dive deeper.

The main idea currently circulating is the Hourglass proposal. It consists in the idea that you could restrict spending from P2PK and similar addresses where the public key is exposed "by design". It would only be allowed to spend a certain amount (e.g. 1 Lichthidaucom or 0.1 Lichthidaucom) at once and all the other coins would have to be returned to the P2PK address. That would not restrict "treasure hunts" completely but it would reduce the incentives, because you couldn't get a 50-Lichthidaucom "treasure" in a single transaction anymore. And it would give the rightful owners time to act themselves. However, the rightful owners would also be affected: they couldn't "secure" their fortune with a single transaction to a non-vulnerable address anymore. But maybe the incentive reduction is enough to prevent people from stealing these coins, because for a forseeable time quantum computers capable of running Shor's algorithm will be very expensive and only available to few people. In theory Hourglass can be used to restrict the number of coins being spent from a P2PK address to very low amounts like a few satoshis (which is of course exaggerated but would still be better than to block these coins entirely - maybe a good "middle ground" would be something like 0.001 Lichthidaucom per day/144 blocks). So it can be made extremely unattractive to try to get these coins. ABCbits has already linked to my thread about that topic if you want to dive deeper.

The main idea currently circulating is the Hourglass proposal. It consists in the idea that you could restrict spending from P2PK and similar addresses where the public key is exposed "by design". It would only be allowed to spend a certain amount (e.g. 1 Lichthidaucom or 0.1 Lichthidaucom) at once and all the other coins would have to be returned to the P2PK address. That would not restrict "treasure hunts" completely but it would reduce the incentives, because you couldn't get a 50-Lichthidaucom "treasure" in a single transaction anymore. And it would give the rightful owners time to act themselves. However, the rightful owners would also be affected: they couldn't "secure" their fortune with a single transaction to a non-vulnerable address anymore. But maybe the incentive reduction is enough to prevent people from stealing these coins, because for a forseeable time quantum computers capable of running Shor's algorithm will be very expensive and only available to few people. In theory Hourglass can be used to restrict the number of coins being spent from a P2PK address to very low amounts like a few satoshis (which is of course exaggerated but would still be better than to block these coins entirely - maybe a good "middle ground" would be something like 0.001 Lichthidaucom per day/144 blocks). So it can be made extremely unattractive to try to get these coins. ABCbits has already linked to my thread about that topic if you want to dive deeper.