What will happen if quantum computer owners start to move the early mined coins?

[QUANTUMInstruction]

We don't know whether quantum computers will exist or not, but assume they will be built and some QC owners will move the early mined coins. What will happen?

Case 1
They (QC owners) could move the early mined coins, which are mined to P2PK addresses and haven't been moved since then.
They could let these coins there for a certain time to give potential owners the possibility to prove (signed message) that they are the owners and transfer these coins to them.
If there is no owner, the QC owners are the new owners.

Case 2
Some BTC owners will not accept case 1. They will create a hard / soft fork and burn these early mined coins.

In both cases we have to implement QC resistant addresses immediately.


Case 3
They (QC owners) will move all possible coins (also from active addresses).
In this case the Bitcoin price would collapse and it would end the Bitcoin project.



Case 1 gives the QC owners the possibility to improve our Bitcoin network and make it quantum resistant and reward them with these early mined coins. If there are still owners of early mined and not moved coins, they have the chance to move the coins and will get them back even after being moved, if they prove it (signed message) within a certain time period. Case 1 would lead to a smooth transition to a quantum resistant Bitcoin network and would be the strongest fork.

[1714071350]

1714071350

[1714071350]

1714071350

[QUANTUMInstruction]

~~~ reserved ~~~

[DannyHamilton]

LONG BEFORE before any actual Quantum Algorithm AND Quantum Computer exists that would allow someone to access the bitcoins secured by P2PKH, Bitcoin will already have moved to a quantum-resistant authorization algorithm.  This will prevent Case 3, prevent the need for Case 2, and will allow plenty of time for any users that are still able to access their bitcoins to move those bitcoins with a quantum-resistant transaction.  The coins that are still remaining in the weak transaction outputs once Quantum Technology becomes a realistic threat will be those coins that are effectively "lost".  The QC owners will become the new owners of those coins, and Bitcoin will carry on as it always has.

[QUANTUMInstruction]

LONG BEFORE before any actual Quantum Algorithm AND Quantum Computer exists that would allow someone to access the bitcoins secured by P2PKH, Bitcoin will already have moved to a quantum-resistant authorization algorithm.  This will prevent Case 3, prevent the need for Case 2, and will allow plenty of time for any users that are still able to access their bitcoins to move those bitcoins with a quantum-resistant transaction.  The coins that are still remaining in the weak transaction outputs once Quantum Technology becomes a realistic threat will be those coins that are effectively "lost".  The QC owners will become the new owners of those coins, and Bitcoin will carry on as it always has.

You got it and support a strong Bitcoin network.

[cacanin]

From what I know, quantum computers will appear only in 10 years. The "companies of evil" (IBM, Google etc) will not allow this happen sooner.

[dothebeats]

The real question lies on how long quantum computers would be fully-functional and operational in large scale and not just existing in laboratory conditions. Anyway, I'm pretty sure the community and the developers working on bitcoin know the possible threat of quantum computing should it ever go live within the tech space. Before that goes full-blown, we may have moved to a completely quantum-resistant algorithm that deflects any sort of brute-forcing and/or possible exploits affecting P2PKH addresses.

Should coins that were mined early and are deemed inaccessible were retrieved by QC owners and the community knew about it, perhaps a fork would be proposed and we'd take it from there and accept the fact that these coins are permanently lost in the void without any chance of retrieval.

The bitcoin community is comprised of bright minds capable of coming up with solutions even to theoretical problems, so I'm banking on that fact heavily.

[Nadziratel]

We don't know whether quantum computers will exist or not, but assume they will be built and some QC owners will move the early mined coins. What will happen?

Case 1
They (QC owners) could move the early mined coins, which are mined to P2PK addresses and haven't been moved since then.
They could let these coins there for a certain time to give potential owners the possibility to prove (signed message) that they are the owners and transfer these coins to them.
If there is no owner, the QC owners are the new owners.

Case 2
Some BTC owners will not accept case 1. They will create a hard / soft fork and burn these early mined coins.

In both cases we have to implement QC resistant addresses immediately.


Case 3
They (QC owners) will move all possible coins (also from active addresses).
In this case the Bitcoin price would collapse and it would end the Bitcoin project.



Case 1 gives the QC owners the possibility to improve our Bitcoin network and make it quantum resistant and reward them with these early mined coins. If there are still owners of early mined and not moved coins, they have the chance to move the coins and will get them back even after being moved, if they prove it (signed message) within a certain time period. Case 1 would lead to a smooth transition to a quantum resistant Bitcoin network and would be the strongest fork.

Actually yes there is a known Quantum PC now.
Google claim they have an operational quantum pc: https://www.ft.com/content/b9bb4e54-dbc1-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17


But you shouldn't fear from quantum computer. It is still hard to hack any crypto wallets. And also quantum computers can mine cryptocurrencies faster than ever.

[eaLiTy]

We don't know whether quantum computers will exist or not, but assume they will be built and some QC owners will move the early mined coins. What will happen?

The fact is everything evolves, if there is a technology that will attack certain protocols then it will evolve, if someone creates a Quantum Computer then they will plan to something that will benefit them rather than destroying something, that been said you need not worry about one in the next 20 years.

But you shouldn't fear from quantum computer. It is still hard to hack any crypto wallets. And also quantum computers can mine cryptocurrencies faster than ever.

The time interval does not change and the price is not affordable to built a Quantum Computer to mine BTCitcoin and even if someone creates i doubt it will be able to overpower all the hashing power around the world and hence it is an impossible task. If someone is creating specifically to mine BTCitcoin then he must be really crazy and have a few millions at his disposal.

[shield132]

From what I know, quantum computers will appear only in 10 years. The "companies of evil" (IBM, Google etc) will not allow this happen sooner.

What do you mean in appear? To be quantum computers accessible for everyone? Maybe not in 10 but in 20-30 year that may happen and then quantum will be perceive as normal as current PCs. But on another hand google's quantum computer already exists.
OP every problem is solvable, what is computer? Combination of numbers and numbers are part of math. Math can create and solve problems, so when there will be that problem, it will be solved too and as DannyHamilton correctly mentioned quantum-resistant authorization algorithm.

[Nadziratel]

But you shouldn't fear from quantum computer. It is still hard to hack any crypto wallets. And also quantum computers can mine cryptocurrencies faster than ever.

The time interval does not change and the price is not affordable to built a Quantum Computer to mine BTCitcoin and even if someone creates i doubt it will be able to overpower all the hashing power around the world and hence it is an impossible task. If someone is creating specifically to mine BTCitcoin then he must be really crazy and have a few millions at his disposal.

Of course, we're talking about a possibility here. But a person's probability of owning a quantum PC for mining is always more likely than trying to hack a Bitcoin wallet. If I had a quantum PC, I'm sure I'd use it for much better things.

[alyssa85]

If Quantum Computers did exist (at great expense) - why would they waste that computing power on bitcoin which won't give them enough returns, compared to other uses they could put Quantum Computing to?

I don't understant why people are so convinced that QCs would be deployed in the cryptocurrency space which is only worth a few billion, compared to say stock markets or the trillion dollar forex markets where you could make so much more money?

[SapienHumanRating]

 The description of how quantum computers work didn't capture why they are special; everything we always saying (e.g. superposition, computing everything in parallel) is also true of a "normal" computer equipped with random numbers. The thing that makes quantum computers special is the interference; some of the parallel paths can cancel each other out. Without that, superposition would be useless.

Also, it's not really true that the motivation for quantum computers is the physical limits of transistors. We started studying quantum computing long before those limits were a problem, and there's not much overlap between people working on quantum computing and people working on smaller transistors. They're just separate issues - both interesting and important.

[Blitzboy]

Do you think it's easy to own a quantum computer? I am sure NO, the value of a quantum computer is extremely large, do you think someone uses its power just to mine bitcoin? I'm sure no one does that stupid thing, quantum computers should be used for more complex and important calculations.

According to some previous news, the first quantum computer was created by Google, it is no longer a distant thing.

[QUANTUMInstruction]

We will have a quantum resistant Bitcoin network, there is no doubt. But we will have two main Bitcoin forks post quantum.

The question is which of the two main Bitcoin forks will be supported.

1. A Bitcoin blockchain with all existing coins (also Satoshi's early mined coins and other early mined coins with no owner). Here the QC owners will remove those coins and will be the new owners and the community 1 of this fork will accept it as a reward to QC owners. If there were owners of early mined and not moved coins, they could have moved these coins. As they didn't, the community 1 will handle them as "lost" coins.

..once Quantum Technology becomes a realistic threat will be those coins that are effectively "lost".  The QC owners will become the new owners of those coins, and Bitcoin will carry on as it always has.

2. A Bitcoin blockchain without the early mined coins. Community 2 will not accept it that someone (QC owners) gets the early mined coins and will burn them.

Should coins that were mined early and are deemed inaccessible were retrieved by QC owners and the community knew about it, perhaps a fork would be proposed and we'd take it from there and accept the fact that these coins are permanently lost in the void without any chance of retrieval.

[DannyHamilton]

When objects of value are found in a ship wreck at the bottom of the sea, should those that managed to find the wreck be allowed to profit from that find?  Or should a government agency take evderything salvaged and destroy it?

[QUANTUMInstruction]

When objects of value are found in a ship wreck at the bottom of the sea, should those that managed to find the wreck be allowed to profit from that find?  Or should a government agency take evderything salvaged and destroy it?

Some BTC owners think that if you burn the early mined coins and don't give the QC owners the possibility to get these, then the supply will go down and their coins will be more valuable. But you never know which coins will be burned next.

And some support the "21 million BTC supply" and let the QC owners get these coins. In that case we are responsible for our coins and if coins aren't being moved from old accounts to newer ones, we assume that these coins are "lost" and if QC owners develop a computer to get them, so it's their reward. But these group will always know that their coins won't be burned. Never. And therefore this blockchain will be the strongest.

It is a different thing, if someone hacks your computer and gets your coins or if a QC owner gets the "lost" coins.

[figmentofmyass]

LONG BEFORE before any actual Quantum Algorithm AND Quantum Computer exists that would allow someone to access the bitcoins secured by P2PKH, Bitcoin will already have moved to a quantum-resistant authorization algorithm.  This will prevent Case 3, prevent the need for Case 2, and will allow plenty of time for any users that are still able to access their bitcoins to move those bitcoins with a quantum-resistant transaction.

"long before" implies you know when QC will be capable of breaking ECDSA. when will that be---and accordingly, when will bitcoin developers discuss which quantum resistant scheme to implement, and when to implement it?

what constitutes "plenty of time" for users to upgrade? considering how slowly users adopted P2SH or segwit outputs, bitcoin should probably implement quantum resistant signatures many years before the threat is even remotely real. otherwise many millions of coins could be stolen, just by virtue of today's common practices of address reuse, xpub sharing, etc.

upgrading to a post-quantum protocol in a conscientious way will take several years at least. when are we gonna start discussing the details?

[hatshepsut93]

upgrading to a post-quantum protocol in a conscientious way will take several years at least. when are we gonna start discussing the details?

When cryptographic community as a whole will reach both 1) a consensus on what quantum-ready algorithms will become the standard and 2) decide that it's time to start switching to it.
There's no need for Bitcoin to be on the cutting edge cryptography, it would only mean unnecessary risks and forks after forks.

[figmentofmyass]

upgrading to a post-quantum protocol in a conscientious way will take several years at least. when are we gonna start discussing the details?

When cryptographic community as a whole will reach both 1) a consensus on what quantum-ready algorithms will become the standard and 2) decide that it's time to start switching to it.

There's no need for Bitcoin to be on the cutting edge cryptography, it would only mean unnecessary risks and forks after forks.

quantum resistance =/= cutting edge. lamport signatures are from the 70s.

centralized entities can quickly implement new encryption and reverse most of the damage done if QC breaks current standards. they can afford to wait. bitcoin is irreversible, and people take years to upgrade. there would be 5 million+ coins up for grabs if QC broke ECDSA today---and that's not even considering p2pkh inputs that might be stolen in-flight.

if we want to reduce that number (ie prevent many millions of coins from being stolen) we need to act sooner than later, because again---people take years to upgrade their bitcoin software. by various estimates, ECDSA could be broken within 3-7 years. that doesn't leave us much time.

[hatshepsut93]

quantum resistance =/= cutting edge. lamport signatures are from the 70s.

centralized entities can quickly implement new encryption and reverse most of the damage done if QC breaks current standards. they can afford to wait. bitcoin is irreversible, and people take years to upgrade. there would be 5 million+ coins up for grabs if QC broke ECDSA today---and that's not even considering p2pkh inputs that might be stolen in-flight.

if we want to reduce that number (ie prevent many millions of coins from being stolen) we need to act sooner than later, because again---people take years to upgrade their bitcoin software. by various estimates, ECDSA could be broken within 3-7 years. that doesn't leave us much time.

People don't upgrade their nodes because they are compatible with the network, if there was a hardfork, you can expect them to switch rather quickly. Look at ETH or other alts, they have hard forks almost every year and they go pretty smooth.

If quantum computers became real today, the world would be in a lot of trouble - bank account, emails, websites, military communications, classified data and so on - but you don't see them proactively moving to post-quantum crypto right now, which means that the cryptographic community doesn't view as an immediate threat. And cryptographers usually retire algorithms long before they become not even fully broken, but just weakened.