Fastest mean for Bitcoiners to be prepare for post quantum?

[PrivacyG]

This are good suggestions but they are not enough, and I am thinking what is going to happen with all the lost and dormant coins  

They will probably be the first targets.  It would be very stupid if the target was not the most vulnerable which are also the most valuable Addresses.  If this happens then I presume one of the first targets will be any of the presumably Satoshi owned Addresses.  They contain too much value for a Quantum Computer to try and hit a thousand Dollar UTXO.

I do not know.  I have mixed feelings.  On one hand I believe it is the job of their owners to protect them from what danger comes in the future.  On the other hand there are situations where it is not the fault of the owners.  For example.  Some body may have died 10 years ago with a lot of Bitcoin on a Wallet and their family has simply not searched their computer well enough yet.  Do they deserve a loss?

On the other hand there is no thing else to do.  They can either be left alone vulnerable or vulnerable Addresses can be blocked maybe.  But then this comes with its own risks.  Out of all the possibilities out there I wish Bitcoin NEVER has any 'migration' or Fork that ends up losing peoples Money.

What do you think?

[zabzob]

The new Qastle wallet is one example. Looks like a gimmick to me tho, I wouldn't pay for something like that. Just another example of companies trying to monetize people's uninformed fears about the quantum threat.

I would never use that Qastle crap wallet, and it doesn't matter what wallet claims when base bitcoin blockchain is not quantum resistant.

100% agreed.

A software-wallet version of what Trezor is doing with their overpriced Trezor Safe 7, making empty and misleading claims about it having "quantum-safe architecture and firmware."  

Trezor Safe 7 is not overpriced at all, it's offering more than all competition, and best security.

Not everyone would agree with that. With so many different options and approaches to security on the market now, it's difficult to claim that any one hardware wallet offers the "best security" and "more than all the competition" for all bitcoiners. Trezor 7 is not air-gapped, so not offering more than all competition, or best security--at least for those who prefer their signing device air-gapped. Or stateless, which Trezor also does not offer. And some prefer a DIY option as an added security feature. And Trezor 7 also lacks an option for user-added physical entropy for seed creation, like dice-rolls. Some would rather have these features than claims of "readiness" for some imagined quantum future. In my opinion, $250 is a lot to spend on a wallet that lacks so many security features. That's why it's a good thing there are now so many options on the market. To each their own.

They only claimed to be quantum-ready, so there is nothing misleading about that.
Instead of making false accusations you should read what quantum-ready means:

Thanks for this info, that does clarify the issue. I'm not making any accusations, just stating my personal opinion. I find Trezor's marketing about quantum readiness, quantum-safe or whatever to be a ploy to charge higher prices. I may be wrong, but that's how I see it.

[suzanne5223]

Yeah people have been saying this for years but go look at many exchange wallets out there, they all reuse the same addresses thousands of times.
[snip]

Yes, people can reuse the same wallet address since the QC attack has not yet happened, but some of the reused wallet addresses for spending will be eentropy will be attacked with QC when the time comes. This is why this thread is a post QC to keep people informed so they won't be affected due ot lack of knowledge.

In contrast, Bitcoin will function normally in a world with powerful quantum computers with no issue. However, all the exposed public keys holding BTC will be in danger when a quantum computer with the right computing power is created, and we all know that most of the public keys we used on this forum are exposed to the public.

When I saw the Tweet posted by Willy yesterday on X (formerly Twitter), about what Bitcoiners should do for the preparation of post quantum I believe this needs to be shared so we can share knowledge, maybe it will help me and some Bitcoiners.

What's your take on all his explanations concerning the quantum attack day?

So I’ve been thinking, if the threats as we hope to assume that the Quantum computing age would cause it makes me wonder though, just how many address would not be offline and how does that works.

How it will work is that the attacker uses the Quantum to attack the exposed public wallet entropy ^{(and the wallet with weak entropy private information will be known)}, and it can also be used in mining space to find the next block early.

Most of the address we transact with ends up coming online every now and then, the address that are published on the blockchain after every transaction is initiated and proceeded. These details surfaces online and how traceable Bitcoin transactions are…

This is why the HD wallet is advised to be used, but needs to avoid spending from the public address used more than once.

If people become too scared of the safety of Bitcoin in a computing age, it raises the question of why should they indulge.

To prevent such a situation is the reason for this post-quantum awareness, so we can all get the needed understanding and knowledge about how we can protect ourselves from an attack.