Quantum computing and bitcoin

[Tyrantt]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

[1715029611]

1715029611

[1715029611]

1715029611

[1715029611]

1715029611

[RodeoX]

In the future it could have an impact. If SHA encryption is broken for example. However bitcoin would be the least of our worries if that happened. Much of the internet would be vulnerable.  

EDIT: It is also true that if we saw this coming we could switch to another encryption scheme.

[croutonhexagon]

Quantum computing is far from current generation still many research and development is going on but to implement bitcoin in quantum computing it will take few years more and once we have quantam computer then I think it wont take much time to mine all the bitcoin that 21 million bitcoin. But still we have to wait till we could afford to buy quantum computer.

[ArcCsch]

I am more worried that quantum computing would be able to forge elliptic curve digital signatures, totally destroying Bitcoin by invalidating proof of ownership.

[danfoda]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

I dont think so. We have long way to quantum computing. Lets not get ahead of ourselves, haha.

[RodeoX]

I am more worried that quantum computing would be able to forge elliptic curve digital signatures, totally destroying Bitcoin by invalidating proof of ownership.

Amen to that!

[marleybobthedog]

For successful implementation of quantam computing it would take many more decades and to afford that computer for personal or ho.e usages we will have to wait few more years. And I don't think that bitcoin and Quantam computing will share their hands becore 2050. Quantum computing is something like science fiction but it's going to happen in reality but it's far from our imagination.

[gentlemand]

Perhaps quantum computing is another cold fusion. It might remain on the horizon for what seems like forever. And if it does arrive and starts cracking all encryption Bitcoin's going to one of your lesser worries when all remote commerce is vulnerable.

[raphma]

quantum computing is being developed as much as encryption is being improved. we might have a problem in the future, but it's unlikely to happen.

[~Bitcoin~]

Quantum computer are still way far than reality and actually it is only the concept. Even what can be done with quantum computer is not identified or imagined till now so it will be quite early to give any idea regarding its impact on bitcoin.

[ranochigo]

ECDSA may get compromised due to the Shor's algorithm if Quantum computing becomes a reality. This would mean that private keys may get derived from the public key. Something as simple as stopping the address re-use could prevent such things since cracking the public key does take sometime. I expect Bitcoin to move to a new algorithm before then though.

[Clement Kaliyar]

i agree with everyone that suggest that quantum computing does take a very long time to become a reality,theoretically it is based on light and photons and the success of it depends upon how they succeed in the interaction of light and photons and their precision, hope they will succeed in creating a quantum logic gate in a few years .

[n691309]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

I have read a post from theymos and from an analyze bitcoin is protected from these quantum computers for few or more years. I think until then bitcoin will be prepared from these quantum computers.

[Hazir]

Quantum Computing breaking bitcoin is a myth, nothing more. Do you think that in times when we will see real,working quantum computer bitcoin network will be still running on the same old 'engine'?

What is most likely scenario - bitcoin network will be upgraded to match current technological progress. Plus - Bitcoin is not the primary target in case we we will have suddenly QC - traditional banking is.

They are using encryption, old school networking and all these features will  make them more susceptible to attacks that bitcoin network ever will.

[Kprawn]

We will have another Y2K event, where all secure sites and technologies using the current algorithms need to upgrade to something

stronger, this includes Bitcoin. I am not saying that there will not be a window period, where there will be vulnerabilities, but whomever

gets to develop Quantum computers first, will give us enough warning to upgrade. { They will boast about their accomplishment, way in

advance } 

[Lauda]

Why do people always ask the same questions over and over again, without even spending 5 seconds trying to search for the answers themselves? This topic was beaten to death, and here are some examples:
Quantum computer? So what! No worries...(?)
Quantum computer mining
Quantum computers and Bitcoin

Quantum Computing breaking bitcoin is a myth, nothing more.

No, actually it is not. Quantum computers could break ECSDA to being with.

[ranlo]

EDIT: It is also true that if we saw this coming we could switch to another encryption scheme.

This is the part so many people neglect to realize. If quantum computing made any real impact on things like encryption, we'd have more processing power to create a better, more secure one. And since BTC is open source, that is a quick and easy solution. At the same time, however, it would disable all current ASICs, and I do believe most altcoins would be susceptible (as the majority don't even follow current development).

[ekoice]

Quantum computing is  definitely a matter of serious concern.
It is said that it will break the block chain mechanism.
I think it will take more time to come to reality

[XCASH]

EDIT: It is also true that if we saw this coming we could switch to another encryption scheme.

This is the part so many people neglect to realize. If quantum computing made any real impact on things like encryption, we'd have more processing power to create a better, more secure one. And since BTC is open source, that is a quick and easy solution. At the same time, however, it would disable all current ASICs, and I do believe most altcoins would be susceptible (as the majority don't even follow current development).

Bitcoin modified to use a quantum cryptography algorithm would probably make it even more secure. Quantum techniques could strengthen a modified Bitcoin's security, not destroy it. There is a paper at SANS discussing quantum cryptography which concludes that "quantum techniques should meet the encryption needs of users, perhaps indefinitely".

Quantum Encryption - A Means to Perfect Security?

It gives three reasons that make quantum cryptography uncrackable in the paragraph below.

Quantum cryptography is thought to be secure for three main reasons (Lo). One, the quantum no-cloning theorem states that an unknown quantum state cannot be cloned. Theoretically, messages sent using quantum cryptography would be in an unknown quantum state, so they could not be copied and sent on. Two, in a quantum system, which can be in one of two states, any attempt to measure the quantum state will disturb the system. A quantum message that is intercepted and read by an eavesdropper will become garbled and useless to the intended recipient of the message. Three, the effects produced by measuring a quantum property are irreversible, which means an eavesdropper cannot “put back” a quantum message to its original state. These three properties provide the power of quantum cryptography. No amount of effort or genius can alter the fact that observing a quantum property irrevocably alters the object being observed.

It also adds that the first prototype demonstrating encrypting and decrypting quantum messages was invented in 1989, so quantum cryptography is no longer just theoretical.

Public key cryptography was invented in the 1970s by Diffie, Hellman and Merkle. It differed from previous encryption systems in that the groups sending messages did not have to agree on a key beforehand. The encryption key is in the public domain, so anyone can encrypt a message, while the related decryption key is held privately so that one person or a trusted group of people are the only ones able to decrypt the message. In 1989, the first fully working prototype of an instrument that encrypted and decrypted quantum messages was produced at the IBM Thomas Watson Research Center. In this case, the information was transmitted over a distance of only a few inches and the transmission rate was very low (Dwyer).

[cjmoles]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

[Lauda]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future? 

Because they are only using a small amount of qubits (latest model 1152) at the moment. These computers are only very fast in certain types of operations, and may even be slower than traditional computers in others.

Is the future now?

I'd say not yet.

“You need to read the fine print,” says Matthias Troyer of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. “This is 108 times faster than some specific classical algorithm on problems designed to be very hard for that algorithm but easy for D-Wave.” In other words, the D-Wave had a massive home advantage.

Better versions of the simulated annealing algorithm can reduce this advantage to just 100 times faster, says Troyer, while other more complex algorithms running on an ordinary PC can beat D-Wave entirely. “A claim of ’108 speedup’ is thus very misleading,” he says.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28641-experts-doubt-googles-claim-about-its-quantum-computers-speed/
You can probably finder more/better information if you spend more time researching into it.

[cjmoles]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?

Because they are only using a small amount of qubits (latest model 1152) at the moment. These computers are only very fast in certain types of operations, and may even be slower than traditional computers in others.

Is the future now?

I'd say not yet.

“You need to read the fine print,” says Matthias Troyer of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. “This is 108 times faster than some specific classical algorithm on problems designed to be very hard for that algorithm but easy for D-Wave.” In other words, the D-Wave had a massive home advantage.

Better versions of the simulated annealing algorithm can reduce this advantage to just 100 times faster, says Troyer, while other more complex algorithms running on an ordinary PC can beat D-Wave entirely. “A claim of ’108 speedup’ is thus very misleading,” he says.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28641-experts-doubt-googles-claim-about-its-quantum-computers-speed/
You can probably finder more/better information if you spend more time researching into it.

I agree.  If I spent more time looking at all the specs, I would be more aware....and I have spent some time looking into it.  But, my point was that there are already quantum computers in use and pre-orders are already filled for the next generation machines....Quantum computers are here now and the number of qubits they're achieving each year is growing at a pace that rivals Moore's Law....I don't think bitcoin needs to be overly concerned because the network will adjust.

[Hugroll]

In the future it could have an impact. If SHA encryption is broken for example. However bitcoin would be the least of our worries if that happened. Much of the internet would be vulnerable.  

agreed, the amount of resources that go into funding and operating a quantum computer is extremely extremely high. i really doubt anyone would be using such amazing processing power to brute force a bitcoin private key.

[tubehand]

In the future it could have an impact. If SHA encryption is broken for example. However bitcoin would be the least of our worries if that happened. Much of the internet would be vulnerable.  

Nexus is the only coin in development with the foresight to see the back lash QC will have on current block chain tech.

Pretry interesting check em out

EDIT: It is also true that if we saw this coming we could switch to another encryption scheme.

[franky1]

in regards to quantum computing people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
quantum/d-wave (once you wash away the foolish buzzwords of it) is simple. instead of a micro transistor having 2 options(binary).. it has 4.

and here is where the magic evaporates.
in binary
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no/negative/dark)
imagine 1 volt is 1(true/on/yes/positive/light)

now.. imagine instead of 2 options. there are four options 0 1 2 3
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no)
imagine 0.33 volts is 1(not false not true/not off not on/not no not yes)
imagine 0.66 volts is 2(false and true/off and on/ no and yes)
imagine 1 volt is 3(true/on/yes)

now imagine all this shit about trans-dimensional space, time travel and parallel states as just bait, to keep the very simple logical process from being revealed(avoid corporate competition by not revealing the simple secret sauce ingredient) of micro transistors with 4 options instead of 2

the whole "new states of both on and off" is just wishy washy wording, meant only for sci-fi movies because its not actually any magic of
binary "off / on"
dwave "off / not off not on/ off AND on / on"

as these are just attributes(names) and those 2 new options in the middle can mean anything you want it to mean.
yes / maybe / not sure / no
yes / sometimes / not often / no
night / morning / afternoon / evening

all you need to know is a micro transistor in a Dwave has 4 options instead of 2.
an 8 bit dwave 'byte' allows for 65,536 possibles(4^8) instead of 8 bit binary 'byte' allowing for 256 possibles(2^8)
this allow a hex to be stored using just two bits instead of 4bits
meaning you can store FFFF(33333333) in one dwave byte instead of just FF in a binary byte(11111111)

its utility for compression and speed improvement of data is limited. but its utility in logic problems opens up immensely.

its just going to take time for then to think up some logic problems that can utilise the 2 extra options.

if you want to think of it like a switch.
bright light on / romantic dim setting / movie-gaming dim setting / light off.
if your light switch in your living room or den only has on or off. your missing out on 'mood lighting'. get yourself a dimmer switch
and then spend some time thinking about what you will use the two new dimmer settings for, but be warned they are not for trans-dimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

[Hugroll]

people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
~~~ but be warned they are not for transdimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

lol no one said quantum computers is going to take you to different universes. this is about the processing power of the computers being greater and how someone can use that bruteforce a privatekey.

[tubehand]

The only coin Dev team with the foresight to see 10 years into the future and be prepared for quantum computing.

Just like satoshi had the insight with bitcoin.

Nxs team is no joke. All it takes is some DD to find out


http://www.nexusearth.com

https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@keithsmih/nexus-earth-nxs-the-most-secure-cryptocurrency-on-earth

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@gjsteele71/nexus-crypto-currency-simplified-a-guide-for-everyone

[franky1]

people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
~~~ but be warned they are not for transdimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

lol no one said quantum computers is going to take you to different universes. this is about the processing power of the computers being greater and how someone can use that bruteforce a privatekey.

im talking more about the comedy of the D-wave CEO doing TED talks and magazine interviews trying to sell d-wave using words fit only for a sci-fi novel

[cjmoles]

in regards to quantum computing people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
quantum/d-wave (once you wash away the foolish buzzwords of it) is simple. instead of a micro transistor having 2 options(binary).. it has 4.

and here is where the magic evaporates.
in binary
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no/negative/dark)
imagine 1 volt is 1(true/on/yes/positive/light)

now.. imagine instead of 2 options. there are four options 0 1 2 3
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no)
imagine 0.33 volts is 1(not false not true/not off not on/not no not yes)
imagine 0.66 volts is 2(false and true/off and on/ no and yes)
imagine 1 volt is 3(true/on/yes)

now imagine all this shit about trans-dimensional space, time travel and parallel states as just bait, to keep the very simple logical process from being revealed(avoid corporate competition by not revealing the simple secret sauce ingredient) of micro transistors with 4 options instead of 2

the whole "new states of both on and off" is just wishy washy wording, meant only for sci-fi movies because its not actually any magic of
binary "off / on"
dwave "off / not off not on/ off AND on / on"

as these are just attributes(names) and those 2 new options in the middle can mean anything you want it to mean.
yes / maybe / not sure / no
yes / sometimes / not often / no
night / morning / afternoon / evening

all you need to know is a micro transistor in a Dwave has 4 options instead of 2.
an 8 bit dwave 'byte' allows for 65,536 possibles(4^8) instead of 8 bit binary 'byte' allowing for 256 possibles(2^8)
this allow a hex to be stored using just two bits instead of 4bits
meaning you can store FFFF(33333333) in one dwave byte instead of just FF in a binary byte(11111111)

its utility for compression and speed improvement of data is limited. but its utility in logic problems opens up immensely.

its just going to take time for then to think up some logic problems that can utilise the 2 extra options.

if you want to think of it like a switch.
bright light on / romantic dim setting / movie-gaming dim setting / light off.
if your light switch in your living room or den only has on or off. your missing out on 'mood lighting'. get yourself a dimmer switch
and then spend some time thinking about what you will use the two new dimmer settings for, but be warned they are not for trans-dimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

I agree with everything accept the wormhole jumping and trans-dimensional universe hopping.  The way I understand it is that they are especially suited for such applications; in fact, that's the primary cause of the Mandela Effect.  <---Kidding

Tinfoil hats aside:  Considering the 4 different states, I take it that boolean logic wouldn't be effective....but once a more established "fuzzy" logic is standardized, do you think the bitcoin community has it in them to re-vamp the code in a timely and diplomatic manner?

[noormcs5]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I believe quantum computers are a problem for cryptocurrency the future, but I think it will still take a long time for this to happen. Maybe decades or even more.

[Wind_FURY]

There is already news out in reddit that the Litecoin developers headed none other than Charlie Lee will start R&D on the cryptocurrency's upgrades. Among them were confidential transactions, dynamic block sizes and a quantum resistant cryptography method. Maybe the Bitcoin core developers might learn a thing or two from the LTC developers and integrate their research and progress into Bitcoin's protocol.

[Kakmakr]

I see a lot of people here are saying that the Algorithm can be upgraded to solve the increase in the processing threat of the introduction of Quantum computers. Has any experiments been done on the Test Net, to see what the impact of such a upgrade would be?

What would be the next possible upgrade? < SHA-384, SHA-512/224 and SHA-512/256 > ? Would this not slow down the network and transactions considerably?

[ranlo]

in regards to quantum computing people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
quantum/d-wave (once you wash away the foolish buzzwords of it) is simple. instead of a micro transistor having 2 options(binary).. it has 4.

and here is where the magic evaporates.
in binary
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no/negative/dark)
imagine 1 volt is 1(true/on/yes/positive/light)

now.. imagine instead of 2 options. there are four options 0 1 2 3
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no)
imagine 0.33 volts is 1(not false not true/not off not on/not no not yes)
imagine 0.66 volts is 2(false and true/off and on/ no and yes)
imagine 1 volt is 3(true/on/yes)

now imagine all this shit about trans-dimensional space, time travel and parallel states as just bait, to keep the very simple logical process from being revealed(avoid corporate competition by not revealing the simple secret sauce ingredient) of micro transistors with 4 options instead of 2

the whole "new states of both on and off" is just wishy washy wording, meant only for sci-fi movies because its not actually any magic of
binary "off / on"
dwave "off / not off not on/ off AND on / on"

as these are just attributes(names) and those 2 new options in the middle can mean anything you want it to mean.
yes / maybe / not sure / no
yes / sometimes / not often / no
night / morning / afternoon / evening

all you need to know is a micro transistor in a Dwave has 4 options instead of 2.
an 8 bit dwave 'byte' allows for 65,536 possibles(4^8) instead of 8 bit binary 'byte' allowing for 256 possibles(2^8)
this allow a hex to be stored using just two bits instead of 4bits
meaning you can store FFFF(33333333) in one dwave byte instead of just FF in a binary byte(11111111)

its utility for compression and speed improvement of data is limited. but its utility in logic problems opens up immensely.

its just going to take time for then to think up some logic problems that can utilise the 2 extra options.

if you want to think of it like a switch.
bright light on / romantic dim setting / movie-gaming dim setting / light off.
if your light switch in your living room or den only has on or off. your missing out on 'mood lighting'. get yourself a dimmer switch
and then spend some time thinking about what you will use the two new dimmer settings for, but be warned they are not for trans-dimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

First off, this is an awesome explanation (ELI5) of what's going on. I'm not knowledgeable about hardware but that was even easy enough for ME to understand it.

But something people aren't answering WRT changes in algorithm due to faster processing is... ASICs would all be rendered useless, correct? Like aren't ASICs only working with BTC solely because of the current algorithm, such that changing this would render them worthless since they can't be modified? Or is there a way to alter the system in such a way that it's still protected but the current hash power would still be usable? Essentially, I see a huge shift of mining power otherwise, where the first people with quantum ASICs would dwarf all the other hash power combined.

[springgers]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I believe quantum computers are a problem for cryptocurrency the future, but I think it will still take a long time for this to happen. Maybe decades or even more.

             

Same thought however one day it will happen, I hope the Bitcoin will be ready for this, it's a bilateral progress, we don't have to worry about that. Should we?

[Pursuer]

it has always been a battle between technology and improvement of security. this has been going on even before computers were created.

people make safes, robbers make drills to open them, safe makers improve the strength of their safe, robbers get better drills, safe makers improve their security with electronic devices, robbers disable the alarms.

we use sha256 for encryption in bitcoin quantum computers become a thing, we move on to a new and more complicated method of encryption, quantum computers 2.0 become a thing we move to encryption 2.0

and this will continue long after you and me are dead

[markj113]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I agree, and these are the ones we know about.

I am sure there are several generations ahead locked away in secret secure research labs.

[davis196]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

I`m not very familiar with quantum computers.

I don`t know if they will help bitcoin or destroy it.

All i know is that i want a new quantum computer to replace my old PC.

Just kidding.

[Wind_FURY]

people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
~~~ but be warned they are not for transdimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

lol no one said quantum computers is going to take you to different universes. this is about the processing power of the computers being greater and how someone can use that bruteforce a privatekey.

im talking more about the comedy of the D-wave CEO doing TED talks and magazine interviews trying to sell d-wave using words fit only for a sci-fi novel

I just found this one today.

http://www.dwavesys.com/press-releases/d-wave-systems-previews-2000-qubit-quantum-system

So that is not real then or are we missing something? Or maybe the possibility of quantum computers are closer than we thought? The company can be charged with something if they are doing some kind of false advertising for their products, right?

[yayayo]

In the future it could have an impact. If SHA encryption is broken for example. However bitcoin would be the least of our worries if that happened. Much of the internet would be vulnerable.  

Since the topic is centering around Bitcoin, whether we would have to worry about the security of the whole Internet or not is totally irrelevant to the fact that Bitcoin would suffer from SHA becoming insecure. To put it in another way: It's no relief for Bitcoin users, that the Internet is becoming vulnerable as well. So in my eyes this is a non-argument.

For me, it's crystal clear that development must have a plan B well in advance of SHA becoming insecure - regardless if the insecurity comes from quantum computing or some other kind of discovery/invention. We even can't take for granted that there will be clearly visible signs in advance, since most research targeted at breaking encryption happens in secrecy - at three-letter agencies.

Still I don't think that a security threat from Quantum Computing will practically materialize within the next 10 years.

ya.ya.yo!

[Yutikas_11920]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I agree, and these are the ones we know about.

I am sure there are several generations ahead locked away in secret secure research labs.

Yeah it is true, that this is something that becomes our Foundation to stay afloat in the bitcoin. Bitcoin's life will be better, when they could be doing more in-depth research on bitcoin and also use or create devices that support fully about bitcoin. So, just wait for the time to arrive and feel something extraordinary things

[Patatas]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

--Near future would take another 20 years ?
--Bitcoin/Crypto will drastically change in that period if the lightning network changes are deployed.
--Quantum computers will be a real threat to miners since everybody can  mine from their own systems maybe ?
--Will the bitcoin network be able to cope up with the speed at which transactions are processed ?

[franky1]

Considering the 4 different states, I take it that boolean logic wouldn't be effective....but once a more established "fuzzy" logic is standardized, do you think the bitcoin community has it in them to re-vamp the code in a timely and diplomatic manner?

computers are made using binary logic. and as such a computer cannot be d-wave resistant per-se because a binary(normal) system can only work within its own limits (1 byte=256 possible switch combinations).
Dwave still has 8bits but 4 possibilities(0-1-2-3) per bit bit instead of 2(0-1), allowing for quantum computers(QC) to have 65536 combinations.

however QC cant simply throw its result into a binary system "as is" because the data would get lost in translation(binary:'WTF is a 3?'), it requires QC to calculate a solution, and then convert the result back(like an analogue/digital modem) to binary before a normal computer would understand it. which limits QC capabilities when solving binary logic problems

in short
efficiency due to the limits of binary bytes and logic of such, it only allows d-wave a 2x efficiency at solving binary logic problems and requires translating QC result back to binary result to be accepted by and have impact on binary based systems. (so im not worried)

[franky1]

But something people aren't answering WRT changes in algorithm due to faster processing is... ASICs would all be rendered useless, correct? Like aren't ASICs only working with BTC solely because of the current algorithm, such that changing this would render them worthless since they can't be modified? Or is there a way to alter the system in such a way that it's still protected but the current hash power would still be usable?

yes and no.... drastic changing the algorithm will render the current format of ASICS useless.
imagine an algorithm as a map of a city requiring you to travel the streets. the puzzle is to get to a certain destination.
normal CPU/GPU are not efficient as they need to drive down different streets and allow for other traffic.
an asic is a GPS route planner that knows the route as it is programmed to only follow that route, and there is no other traffic to contend with.
making it super efficient.

if someone changed the puzzle to a completely different town. and ASIC would end up in the wrong place every time
however, there have already been a few optimisations to get to the destination more efficiently without needing to change an asic, but to circumvent QC from a binary system prospective CANT be done effectively without drastic changes, which would effect an asic

however... read on

[franky1]

Essentially, I see a huge shift of mining power otherwise, where the first people with quantum ASICs would dwarf all the other hash power combined.

QC efficiency vs cpu efficiency has already been solved. bitcoin mining pools.
QC power is not anywhere close to todays hashpower.

also
because QC (in peoples doomsday scenarios) is dealing with solving a binary logic problem. QC becomes limited to the rules of binary logic to ensure it gets an acceptable result in the end. so d-wave cannot work with its 65,536 combinations. it has to stick to 256 combinations to be compatible. because QC has 4 possibilities instead of 2. it allows it to need less bits to solve problems

2 problems at once of base2(byte) instead of just 1 byte in binary
4 problems at once of base16(hex) instead of just 2 hex in binary

ill explain and yes its laymens demonstration, not science whitepaper theory so chill out on knitpicks

imagine a byte 00000000 (8 switches)
and the puzzle is to get a certain Hex(base16) result
in binary, an asic splits the byte in 2. and allows 4 switches(0000) to work on one result and 4 switches(0000) to work on another result
where one can start at 0 (binary0000 all switches off and then incrementally turn them on) and go up to 16
the other starts at 16 (binary1111 all switches on and then incrementally turn them off) and go down to 0

so say you wanted to get hex 9
it would take the first lot of switches 10 attempts (0¹,1²,2³,3⁴,4⁵,5⁶,6⁷,7⁸,8⁹,9¹⁰)
0000(0),0001(1),0010(2),0011(3),00100(4),0101(5),0110(6),0111(7),1000( 8 ),1001(9)
it would take the second lot of switches 7 attempts (F¹,E²,D³,C⁴,B⁵,A⁶,9⁷)
1111(F),1110(E),1101(D),1100(C),1011(B),1010(A),1001(9)

however in QC it wont use 4 switches. as the result it would create once going through all the combinations using its 4 switches would result in a base 256 value when converted to binary.

so QC will use 2 switches to stick to a base 16 puzzle allowing for 4 'chances'. where the efficiency is the
where one can start at 0 (QC 00 all switches off and then incrementally turn them on) and go up to 16(hex:F)
the other starts at 16(hex:F) (QC 33 all switches on and then incrementally turn them off) and go down to 0
the other starts at 7(hex:7) (QC 13 ~half switches on and then incrementally turn them off) and go down to 0
the other starts at 8(hex:8 ) (QC 20 ~half switches on and then incrementally turn rest on) and go upto 16(hex:F)

it would take the forth lot of switches, 2 attempts (8¹,9²)
20( 8 ),21(9)
however QC cannot just send its answer "21" into a binary system. it needs to convert it into binary, which takes resources.

which is like saying
binary:
1.switches show 0(0000) and 16(1111)
2. transmit 00001111 which is 0(0000) and 16(1111) as a whole byte
repeat 6 more times(7 total until there is a correct answer) (7x2=14 processes all together) to get to hex 9

QC:
1.switches shows 0(00) 7(13) 8(20) 16(33)
2.convert 0(00) 7(13) to binary 0(0000) 7(0111)
3.transmit 00000111 which is 0(0000) 7(0111) as a whole byte
4.convert 8(20) 16(33) to binary 8(1000) 16(1111)
5.transmit 10001111 which is 8(1000) 16(1111) as a whole byte
repeat 1 more times(2 total) (2x5=10 processes all together) to get to hex 9

yes there may be some ways to make it efficient. but due to the limits of a 256 combination logic and requirement of conversion. QC is not working at its full potential by solving binary logic problems.

QC will only be fully beneficial in instances that do not even use binary logic problems

[tee-rex]

Perhaps quantum computing is another cold fusion. It might remain on the horizon for what seems like forever. And if it does arrive and starts cracking all encryption Bitcoin's going to one of your lesser worries when all remote commerce is vulnerable.

I tend to disagree. Unlike cold fusion, quantum computing seems to be a real deal. It is not some freak (or fraudster) like Andrea Rossi refusing to reveal how his so called "energy catalyzer" actually works (provided it does work in the first place) who is behind developing quantum computers. Quantum computing has a solid theoretical basis, so it is sort of expected that many national governments and military as well as secret agencies are funding further research into the field. Besides that, it has already been demonstrated that quantum computational operations are in fact possible, though on a relatively small number of quantum bits to make it a real threat for the security of popular cryptographic algorithms in general and the one used for Bitcoin in particular. And it may quite be possible that the research, both practical and theoretical, has advanced much further than we are being told or shown.

[Mastsetad]

Quantum computers are not yet introduced if when to be released but it is just a concept based on researches and knowledge, there is still a lot of time until quantum computers come to being and even if they are introduced they wont be on sale like ordinary computers we use now, maybe only the richest people in the world would be able to buy them.

[jtipt]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

There is still a long way to go for quantum computing but when it does come of course it will affect bitcoin. Well it will be able to solve algorithms more fast and mining speed would increase, but then again quantum computers would cost alot so its still prettly much balanced so not many miners would but QCs.

[zasad@]

Without quantum security, our blockchain future is uncertain
DAVID CHAUM(C)
https://cointelegraph.com/news/without-quantum-security-our-blockchain-future-is-uncertain

Two Chinese teams claim to have reached primacy with quantum computers
https://phys.org/news/2021-10-chinese-teams-primacy-quantum.html

Experts are beginning to worry about the impact of quantum computers on internet security and cryptocurrencies.

[Ozero]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

There is still a long way to go for quantum computing but when it does come of course it will affect bitcoin. Well it will be able to solve algorithms more fast and mining speed would increase, but then again quantum computers would cost alot so its still prettly much balanced so not many miners would but QCs.

Previously, it was said that quantum computers are unlikely to appear, because they will not be able to reach such a power to crack the security codes of cryptocurrencies. But they have already appeared and their power is growing. A forecast has already been made that at the current rate of improvement of quantum computers, in a maximum of ten years they will be able to hack cryptocurrency wallets.
I don't think we should relax because of the significant amount of time before this event or because such computers will cost a lot of money. Criminals will lay out any amount, just to own them. After all, then in a short time they will be able not only to return their costs, but also to receive much larger amounts. And the predicted time until such an opportunity may also be reduced due to the fact that technologies are also improving.

[iSynthetic]

could this theoretically make the owner of the QC a monopoly holder?
with the power of a CQ it seems like bitcoin could be mined exponentially faster, collecting the remaining coins much more efficiently..
what would the impact of this be? would holders of bitcoin benefit from this?

[stepwilli]

Previously, it was said that quantum computers are unlikely to appear, because they will not be able to reach such a power to crack the security codes of cryptocurrencies. But they have already appeared and their power is growing. A forecast has already been made that at the current rate of improvement of quantum computers, in a maximum of ten years they will be able to hack cryptocurrency wallets.
I don't think we should relax because of the significant amount of time before this event or because such computers will cost a lot of money. Criminals will lay out any amount, just to own them. After all, then in a short time they will be able not only to return their costs, but also to receive much larger amounts. And the predicted time until such an opportunity may also be reduced due to the fact that technologies are also improving.

Where did you get the info? How did they know that it will not be powerful enough, have they tried that already? Or they say that only based on their estimation. They could have tried it first before they came into that conclusion and if they fail on their first try, I do not think they will gave up easily.

We are now in a much modern world so they would have the right tools to create such type of computers but not all are going to have that and its not going to be cheap so not all will have it and use it only to attempt to crack the btc's and I heard devs are now planning to improve the security of btc. They still have the time to do it before the creation of the first quantum computers.