The post-quantum debate is now cleaving crypto into two distinct camps. One side is marching down the hash-based path, the route @adam3us is charting for Bitcoin. This means decades of peer review, conservative difficulty assumptions, and larger signatures. The other side is lattice-based, choosing Falcon or Dilithium. This is the path most high-throughput chains will be forced to take because hash-based signatures run for several kilobytes, and their transactions were designed for a different era. Every chain in this debate will commit to a single algorithm forever, as their architecture allows no alternative. Stablecoins moving between these camps will need a chain that speaks both. Every Bitcoin holder venturing into DeFi will need a chain that speaks both. Every agent routing the cheapest path through a post-quantum world will need a chain that speaks both. This is precisely why we built @SuiNetwork the way we did. Our chief cryptographer, @kostascrypto, released the first stateless post-quantum signature for blockchain in 2017-2018, nine years before this debate even existed. While every other chain hardcoded a signature scheme into its protocol, we built a verification layer where each algorithm has a flag. Adding a post-quantum scheme means adding a flag, not forking the chain. While every other chain shrinks transactions to fit 2018-era cryptography and runs out of room, we built transactions with 100 times the space. Solana transactions are limited to 1,232 bytes. Ethereum's gas model penalizes anything larger. Sui transactions are limited to 128 kilobytes, nearly 100 times Solana's capacity. SPHINCS+ at 8 to 50 kilobytes fits. Dilithium at 2 to 4 kilobytes fits. Falcon under 2 kilobytes fits. Any combination in native multi-sig fits. While every other chain now faces a forced algorithm choice, we never put ourselves in that position. @adam3us might be right about Bitcoin. @toly might be right about Solana. Both can be right at the same time. The chai...