Bitcoin and quantum computer fud

[m2017]

It appears that this article is creating another type of fud that is based on the assumption that a quantum computer that will destroy the cryptospace will be created soon. This is headshaking to write this article with this as the author's big assumption.

The author is motivated by selfish motives (salary) by hyping up the quantum threats to cryptocurrencies and manipulating the fears of bicoiners.

This is yet another battle (which they've won, if we're discussing it here) between the media and our attention, which they monetize.

In any case, we are not experts on quantum computers. We can only follow the news updates. I will share more news updates on this developing storyline.

Thanks, but we don't need updates. If quantum computing makes a difference, we'll probably know about it right away. But for now, if that moment hasn't arrived yet (and what if the threat is exaggerated?), why panic ahead of time?

[r_victory]

Apocalyptic theories will always exist. I've seen many debunk this quantum issue and say it's practically impossible, while others say the “end” is near. We'll only know when it actually happens; for now, I believe it's just speculation on both sides. Of course, considering the advancement of computing and the power of current computers, a threat isn't crazy, but we can't predict exactly how it will unfold.

[Z-tight]

We'll only know when it actually happens; for now, I believe it's just speculation on both sides.

'We'll know when it happens'? That does not sound comforting, lol. Before it happens, the network would have migrated to post-quantum cryptography, at least that is the plan. And like this article failed to mention, there are proposals to this effect and one can easily research and find it.

Like i have said before, it is the whole story surrounding quantum threat that is fud, and this article proves it to be correct. The agenda is probably to ignite fear in certain bitcoiners who do not know better, so they would sell off their BTC's, and for this author, he aims to deceive people to sell their BTC for ETH. 

[ImGenius]

I don't care about this kind of fud, Even if a powerful quantum computer appear it won't be Able to target many address at a time. But i believe bitcoin technical team will also do something to prevent it. When it appear bitcoin price may drop I wiil use that chance to buy more bitcoin.

It's been 27 years since bitcoin technology is made still no one can break with today's technology, when quantum computer appear don't you think those genius experts who made bitcoin won't make bitcoin technology more powerful that it can't be break within another 100 years.

[Johnlomape]

I don't care about this kind of fud, Even if a powerful quantum computer appear it won't be Able to target many address at a time. But i believe bitcoin technical team will also do something to prevent it. When it appear bitcoin price may drop I wiil use that chance to buy more bitcoin.

It's been 27 years since bitcoin technology is made still no one can break with today's technology, when quantum computer appear don't you think those genius experts who made bitcoin won't make bitcoin technology more powerful that it can't be break within another 100 years.

I don't know why people are bothering themselves about this and I know that the government would never allow something like this to happen. Most of the quantum experimental labs are owned by the government and others are owned by big companies that have the control of the government. I know there will be guidelines how the quantum computers should be operated when the experimental processses is completed and quantum computers start performing their duties. We should buy be worried about quantum computer fud and that looks like a propaganda to make some investors give up on Bitcoin.

[X-ray]

We'll only know when it actually happens; for now, I believe it's just speculation on both sides.

'We'll know when it happens'? That does not sound comforting, lol. Before it happens, the network would have migrated to post-quantum cryptography, at least that is the plan. And like this article failed to mention, there are proposals to this effect and one can easily research and find it.

Hopefully we will be having post-quantum cryptography back then but even with the threat of quantum computer, it's not like the owner of state of the art quantum computers which usually are large corporations are going to use their quantum computer to breach bitcoin blockchain the first time it become viable and not getting entangled into legal consequences.

The fear about quantum computing power sometime feels very strange and abnormal.

[Outhue]

I will consider that article a fud only because they are pointing at crypto only and that's not true, because quantum computers are capable of affecting everything, including military breaches too, the damage will affect everything in the world, so quantum computers won't make it unless there is already a protection in place.

Humans are the ones to create quantum computers, if it's going to be a threat it won't exist, we humans are the only ones that can bring doom unto ourselves, we can also stop it if we choose to, so why will be create something that will destroy everything? Protection first than maybe release later, we've had many discussions about quantum computers already, it's enough.

[Rustam Meraj]

The crazy fictional quantum clock story will get attention seeking people to click, and big investors to shake, and they do not know first thing about open source development.
​Idea that Bitcoin careful governance is downside is totally wrong. It simply does not understand importance of careful governance in the first place. That is slow and very careful agreement process that is heart of the network security against quick and too early rushed changes. Not only would agreement be reached very quickly amongst whole global community in event of actual, real quantum threat, but it would be reached out of sheer survival instinct. Now these pieces are simply repackaging academic research papers from banks such as Citi into shocking doom and gloom headlines. It is simply marketing push to get the hype on alternative assets, and not necessarily showing technology problem right now.

[AmoreJaz]

I will consider that article a fud only because they are pointing at crypto only and that's not true, because quantum computers are capable of affecting everything, including military breaches too, the damage will affect everything in the world, so quantum computers won't make it unless there is already a protection in place.

Humans are the ones to create quantum computers, if it's going to be a threat it won't exist, we humans are the only ones that can bring doom unto ourselves, we can also stop it if we choose to, so why will be create something that will destroy everything? Protection first than maybe release later, we've had many discussions about quantum computers already, it's enough.

That is true, just like AI or robots, they are just relying on what human programmers can do and so, humans have the power to shut down their programs if something unnecessary happens. In the end, humans still have the upper hand as to what will advance technology will do to our life.

[bbc.reporter]

News update.

It appears that when the mining death spiral fud and the Michael Sellor fud is not working, these cryptonews and mainstream news media outlets will again return to this quantum computer fud heheheeh. Is this the bear market fud rotation?

Also, why is an Ethereum foundation working on a solution? What are the real developers of bitcoin replying on this fud?



Coinbase-convened advisory board of some of the most prominent cryptographers in the world has laid out what Bitcoin should do about the millions of coins a future quantum computer could steal, and on the hardest question, it refuses to answer.

The board, which shared the report with CoinDesk earlier this week, includes Scott Aaronson of the University of Texas at Austin, Dan Boneh of Stanford and Justin Drake of the Ethereum Foundation. Its starting point is that quantum computers are not a threat to blockchains today and that nobody knows when they will be, so the debate should not wait on a timeline.

The exposure is concentrated in Bitcoin, however. About 1.7 million bitcoin sit in roughly 20,000 early pay-to-public-key addresses, a format that publishes the owner's public key directly on the blockchain and leaves it open to a quantum attacker.

What the board will not do is choose. It writes that there is no correct answer and that the Bitcoin community has to decide. It commits to only two things, that the technical migration planning should start now because it is separate from the abandoned-coins question, and that holders need clarity so the issue does not fester.

"While the council takes no position on the abandoned coins debate, that's for the community to decide, they are direct about two things: Start the technical migration work now. The engineering work to support post-quantum signatures is independent of the governance debate and shouldn't wait for it."

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/06/13/top-cryptographers-can-t-agree-on-bitcoin-s-biggest-quantum-question

[OsaiEmma]

The quantum clock is ticking: it's Bitcoin's problem, not Ethereum's

If bitcoin and Ethereum had been invented on the same day, nobody would have heard of bitcoin. I sold every bitcoin Bit Digital held and deployed the proceeds into Ethereum. I have built one of the largest corporate Ethereum treasury positions in the world and said, on the record, that we will never sell it. People have asked me to articulate the single strongest argument for that conviction. On March 30, 2026, that argument arrived. Last month, Citi confirmed it.

In a research note published on May 18, Citi analysts warned that quantum computing advances have shortened the timeline for practical attacks on digital assets, and reached a conclusion that should give every institutional bitcoin holder pause: bitcoin faces significantly greater quantum risk than Ethereum, and the gap between them comes down not just to technology but to governance.

One might ask: can't bitcoin simply upgrade? Yes, in theory. In practice, this is where the risk compounds.

Bitcoin's governance is intentionally conservative and consensus-driven, which makes it extraordinarily slow. SegWit took roughly 8.5 years from conception to widespread adoption. Taproot took approximately 7.5 years. The current quantum proposals, BIP-360 and BIP-361, are still at the draft or early testnet stage as of 2026. A full base-layer transition to post-quantum signatures would be the most contentious change bitcoin has ever attempted. As Carter documented, most bitcoin Core developers have expressed limited concern about urgency, a disposition that is, at minimum, a serious governance liability for any institution holding bitcoin in treasury. A quantum breakthrough does not politely wait for committee consensus.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/opinion/2026/06/10/the-quantum-clock-is-ticking-it-s-bitcoin-s-problem-not-ethereum-s

They talk as though the Bitcoin network can't be upgraded to withstand the quantum computer threats. Yes the QC tech is a potential threat, but can it really succeed in destroying the Bitcoin ecosystem? nah....I don't think so.

The devs are already preparing for it from the article above, and I believe that when the time comes, it won't harm the network.

[Renampun]

In any case, we are not experts on quantum computers. We can only follow the news updates.

Even though we are not experts in quantum computers, but at least I believe in the developers who are working to ensure that Bitcoin remains safe and resilient to new technological developments, including potential quantum computing threats.. so I think that there are already proposed solutions for this threat, but because quantum computers are not yet a real threat for now, so we just have to wait until the developers really consider changing to a cryptographic algorithm that is more resistant to quantum attacks.. so the news about quantum threats to Bitcoin is just FUD for me.

[satscraper]

the effort Bitcoin developers (including Blockstream) have already dedicated to find a reasonable path to quantum resistance (SHRINCS, SHRIMPS, Tadge Dryja's recovery mechanism ...).

Blockstream is really ahead of the curve. I would highlight one of their relevant research papers here, namely Taproot PQ Security . It shows that, contrary to common perceptions, the hidden script technique behind Taproot addresses is not breakable by quantum computers because it is based on hash functions, not elliptic-curve cryptography. So one may just embed the post-quantum spending condition inside this script.

As I understand it, Blockstream is committed to deploying post‑quantum protection in their Jade Pro; they expect that when deployment is needed it will not require new hardware.

[d5000]

It shows that, contrary to common perceptions, the hidden script technique behind Taproot addresses is not breakable by quantum computers because it is based on hash functions, not elliptic-curve cryptography. So one may just embed the post-quantum spending condition inside this script.

If there is no valid key-path spend, then this is correct, but that currently requires advanced techniques like basing the key on a NUMS point. But yes, I think this paper was the base for BIP 360 which will allow Taproot transactions without the key path vulnerability.

Thanks for the links. The blockchain site announces that they are working on a BIP to implement post-quantum cryptography already, currently refining the specification.

Second layers with Simplicity support are already supporting post-quantum signatures. Liquid has already shown that, but Liquid is quite centralized. However, I believe it should be possible to build a L2 with a decentralized federation technique like Threshold's "tBTC" or Nomic (using multisig structures). If the two-way peg to this L2 doesn't require reused addresses, then everybody would be able to move their BTC to the L2 and be quite safe transacting with post-quantum cryptography on the L2.

People could then leave the BTC they want to hodl in cold storage on the L1 (never re-using addresses) and periodically "load" some of their BTC to the L2 like a prepaid card to be used for spending or trading.