This is a classic trap logic. Without a private key, you can't access it. Now you're probably starting to doubt, right?

Let's first lay out the fundamental rule of cryptocurrency: Private key = Ownership. This is mathematics, not an attitude issue from any department. The USDT in your account is essentially a digital asset on the chain, the only proof that you are the true owner, and it can only be associated with the corresponding private key.

No private key? No matter how much you claim to be the "original owner," you can't perform any operations on the chain. Without a private key, even if a certain department holds this 1.9 million USDT, it's just a string of code you can see but can't touch—what transfer? And what "confiscation" are you talking about?

Now, look at the problem with this notification: saying "if someone claims it, it will be confiscated"—the moment someone provides the private key, the assets can be transferred directly, and there's no chance for you to "confiscate"; saying "if no one claims it, it will be confiscated"—that's even more absurd. You don't even hold the private key, so why would the chain assets be transferred to the "state treasury"? Any asset movement on the chain is determined by cryptographic signatures, not by a piece of paper.

Ultimately, this "claiming script" either shows a complete misunderstanding of the underlying blockchain logic, treating chain assets like cash and thinking that just by showing an ID card they can be withdrawn; or it’s fully aware that these funds are immovable, purely a gimmick. But in the crypto world, mathematics is the law: without a private key, you can't "claim" or "confiscate" it. These 1.9 million USDT will forever be "dead assets" on the chain.