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.

With the below article, it states that quantum computing will only have detrimental effect to the blockchain if it can easily access its network. If not, it can withstand the threat of quantum computers.

https://101blockchains.com/blockchain-and-quantum-computing/

[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.

[bbc.reporter]

News update.

There will be more articles similar to this where they will mention different company names that are helping break digital signatures and they are doing this faster than before heheheeh.

I speculate that these are articles written by authors who have investments in these companies which make the cause of writing these articles are fud!



AI heavyweight Anthropic said earlier this week that its Claude Mythos Preview model had discovered an attack that halves the effective key strength of HAWK, a proposed replacement for the digital signatures that protect online banking and web payments.

The work took about 60 hours and roughly $100,000 in computing costs, against an algorithm that had survived two years and two rounds of expert human review.

BIP-360, the proposal to give bitcoin quantum-resistant addresses, specifies three algorithms NIST has already standardized, and includes several deliberately so users have fallbacks if one is later broken by quantum or classical advances.

What changed is the speed of the classical side. BIP-361, the companion proposal that would freeze more than a third of bitcoin's supply, argues that the migration window is closing because cryptographic attacks are improving by up to 20-fold. Anthropic's results align with that trend, with a model behind it.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/07/29/bitcoin-s-quantum-plan-assumes-some-algorithms-break-ai-just-weakened-one-in-60-hours

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

There will be more articles similar to this where they will mention different company names that are helping break digital signatures and they are doing this faster than before heheheeh.

Breaking digital signatures, it's ok but let's imagine that they will try doing this with weak signature first before attacking strong ones like Bitcoin private keys.

If things can be "doable" with quantum computers and their powerful computational power, they will try to break passwords to steal accounts, money, sensitive personal identity information, digital signatures of developers, applications from desktop to mobile, and more.

I believe that Bitcoin private keys will be like the very last ones will be attacked because finding an atom in the universe is not achievable with current technology.
Bitcoin keys and addresses.

The size of Bitcoin’s private key space (2²⁵⁶) is an unfathomably large number. It is approximately 10⁷⁷ in decimal. For comparison, the visible universe is estimated to contain 10⁸⁰ atoms.

For now and in the near future, I have no fear about threats and risks from quantum computers.

[Satofan44]

AI heavyweight Anthropic said earlier this week that its Claude Mythos Preview model had discovered an attack that halves the effective key strength of HAWK, a proposed replacement for the digital signatures that protect online banking and web payments.

The work took about 60 hours and roughly $100,000 in computing costs, against an algorithm that had survived two years and two rounds of expert human review.

BIP-360, the proposal to give bitcoin quantum-resistant addresses, specifies three algorithms NIST has already standardized, and includes several deliberately so users have fallbacks if one is later broken by quantum or classical advances.

What changed is the speed of the classical side. BIP-361, the companion proposal that would freeze more than a third of bitcoin's supply, argues that the migration window is closing because cryptographic attacks are improving by up to 20-fold. Anthropic's results align with that trend, with a model behind it.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/07/29/bitcoin-s-quantum-plan-assumes-some-algorithms-break-ai-just-weakened-one-in-60-hours

The conclusion does not follow from the premise, this is classic modern-day fearmongering. Just because some new candidate has had a flaw in it discovered, that does not mean that other things will have flaws in them too. Actually, this case provides ONLY arguments for the side that says we need to take our time with this. If we had picked a signature algorithm already, we could have ended in a HAWK situation -- where a big portion of the Bitcoin network has migrated and it would now be vulnerable or already compromised. People who write these articles and people who interpret them as a sign for their favorite side are some of the most stupid people that exist, they are literally concluding the opposite of the correct conclusion. 

Breaking digital signatures, it's ok but let's imagine that they will try doing this with weak signature first before attacking strong ones like Bitcoin private keys.

No, it is not "ok" and you don't know what is a weak signature and what isn't therefore mentioning generic terms from a point of inexperience about attackers is meaningless.

If things can be "doable" with quantum computers and their powerful computational power, they will try to break passwords to steal accounts, money, sensitive personal identity information, digital signatures of developers, applications from desktop to mobile, and more.

Things are not protected by the same types of cryptography, not every algorithm is built the same way. Just because some things can be broken easily in some way, that does not mean that something else can be broken in the same way. Furthermore, systems have different risk tradeoffs. Banks and whatever other stupid examples people bring will be long patched before there is a risk with them.

I believe that Bitcoin private keys will be like the very last ones will be attacked because finding an atom in the universe is not achievable with current technology.
Bitcoin keys and addresses.

The size of Bitcoin’s private key space (2²⁵⁶) is an unfathomably large number. It is approximately 10⁷⁷ in decimal. For comparison, the visible universe is estimated to contain 10⁸⁰ atoms.

Stop shitposting in topics that you don't know anything about. The size of the private key space has nothing to do with the issues that relate to quantum computers and ECDSA, and this example demonstrates that you have just joined here to write another shitpost and have absolutely zero knowledge on the topic. Since the attacker is not doing brute-forcing attacks, the private key space is completely meaningless. A targeted derivation of the corresponding private key from a known public key is not a brute force attack.

[ImGenius]

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

The title shows that it's a promotional article and a type of fud that push ETH over Bitcoin. But what they are not saying is Ethereum's security fundamentally weaker than Bitcoin and it's also has unlimited supply even if quantum thread comes ethereum can never replace Bitcoin. If something happens to Bitcoin the whole market will collapse including all alts. Thinking this way the promotion doesn't have any value.

[bbc.reporter]

AI heavyweight Anthropic said earlier this week that its Claude Mythos Preview model had discovered an attack that halves the effective key strength of HAWK, a proposed replacement for the digital signatures that protect online banking and web payments.

The work took about 60 hours and roughly $100,000 in computing costs, against an algorithm that had survived two years and two rounds of expert human review.

BIP-360, the proposal to give bitcoin quantum-resistant addresses, specifies three algorithms NIST has already standardized, and includes several deliberately so users have fallbacks if one is later broken by quantum or classical advances.

What changed is the speed of the classical side. BIP-361, the companion proposal that would freeze more than a third of bitcoin's supply, argues that the migration window is closing because cryptographic attacks are improving by up to 20-fold. Anthropic's results align with that trend, with a model behind it.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/07/29/bitcoin-s-quantum-plan-assumes-some-algorithms-break-ai-just-weakened-one-in-60-hours

The conclusion does not follow from the premise, this is classic modern-day fearmongering. Just because some new candidate has had a flaw in it discovered, that does not mean that other things will have flaws in them too. Actually, this case provides ONLY arguments for the side that says we need to take our time with this. If we had picked a signature algorithm already, we could have ended in a HAWK situation -- where a big portion of the Bitcoin network has migrated and it would now be vulnerable or already compromised. People who write these articles and people who interpret them as a sign for their favorite side are some of the most stupid people that exist, they are literally concluding the opposite of the correct conclusion. 

Agreed on fearmongering! In any case, this CEO is declaring that quantum computing will begin having commercial revenue and he is predicting that this will begin on 2028 or 2029. The skeptical me is thinking that this is a prediction that he has created to have a hidden fud, however, there is also an argument that if there is revenue, it will be possible the the development of stronger quantum computers might become faster. Is this real?



Quantum computing nears commercial breakthrough, IBM CEO says

Quantum computing may be approaching its biggest milestone yet: generating meaningful commercial revenue, according to IBM CEO Arvind Krishna, who said the technology is close to becoming a business rather than simply a long-term research project.

Speaking on CNBC's Mad Money on Thursday, Krishna said he expects the sector to begin making a measurable contribution to IBM's revenue and profit by 2028 or 2029.

"By the end of the 2030s, we are now pretty convinced this is a trillion dollars of value," Krishna said, describing what he sees as the long-term economic potential of quantum computing.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/07/31/quantum-computing-nears-commercial-breakthrough-ibm-ceo-says

[dansus021]

first of all, where and how do I get the fud chicken frank, It looks delicious tho haha.

Bitcoin and quantum computer and second is this the simple term is not just for bitcoin but for quantum vs traditional computer and if lets say quantum computer is can operate tomorrow then all encryption today will be broke. Tho Building a quantum computer capable of cracking 256-bit ECC requires millions of stable, error-corrected physical qubits. Today’s state-of-the-art quantum systems operate in the noisy, low-qubit range.

Bitcoin will upgrade its signature schemes via soft forks long before a quantum computer poses a real-world threat and no amount of ETH treasury marketing changes that reality.