Bitcoin and quantum computer fud

[Satofan44]

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.

It is literally not what the title says, and you can't write such nonsensical description and derive meaning that is not present there. Everything relating to quantum computing is more difficult for Bitcoin than any shitcoin or centralized system, this is a fact -- so there are ways to utilize this fact and make exaggerated headlines that still contain the truth. Ethereum is much more centralized with centralized governance, and they already did a rollback for a prior hack -- they can force/freeze/suspend to whatever the fuck they want to existing holders that don't update in time. It is a problem for both chains, but much less so for the Ethereum scam.

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.

No, this is false. Stop repeating this nonsense that I have seen from many users who do not read any substantial posts about this topic and just shitpost whatever comes to mind. The risk of quantum computers, if it ever materializes, is significantly higher for Bitcoin than any other "real-world" system. There is absolutely no guarantee that Bitcoin will "upgrade its signature schemes" in time, whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean since "Bitcoin" can't do anything on its own. There is nothing that is a "reality" when you make false claims like this. However improbable, it is quite possible that a working QC that is able to slowly reverse keys appears before we have upgraded and/or migrated the userbase. Life is not a fucking children's fairy tale and things don't always work out in the end, grow up.

[bbc.reporter]

I reckon that presently AI might be a more serious problem for bitcoin and the cryptospace because this can happen now and this is not only a speculation similar to the arrival of quantum computers.

According to this article there are critical bugs that are being found and the volume of these being found is going higher. The speed on finding them is also increasing!



A volunteer team has flagged 85 critical bugs across 390 bitcoin projects in a little over a day.

Sixteen Bitcoin developers have filed 4,962 findings in a coordinated security audit, including 85 critical and 635 high-severity issues, according to Calle, the pseudonymous developer behind the Cashu ecash protocol.

The findings come from a coordinated audit run by developers pointing AI models at bitcoin wallets, cryptographic libraries and infrastructure.

"Situation is extremely bad," Calle noted.

Most of the critical reports have been quickly verified by project owners, Calle said, and are being reproduced using a working proof of concept in a local test environment before being sent.

But he acknowledged the volume is creating problems of its own.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/08/06/bitcoin-developers-flag-85-critical-bugs-in-an-extremely-bad-situation

[Satofan44]

I reckon that presently AI might be a more serious problem for bitcoin and the cryptospace because this can happen now and this is not only a speculation similar to the arrival of quantum computers.

According to this article there are critical bugs that are being found and the volume of these being found is going higher. The speed on finding them is also increasing!



A volunteer team has flagged 85 critical bugs across 390 bitcoin projects in a little over a day.

Sixteen Bitcoin developers have filed 4,962 findings in a coordinated security audit, including 85 critical and 635 high-severity issues, according to Calle, the pseudonymous developer behind the Cashu ecash protocol.

The findings come from a coordinated audit run by developers pointing AI models at bitcoin wallets, cryptographic libraries and infrastructure.

"Situation is extremely bad," Calle noted.

Most of the critical reports have been quickly verified by project owners, Calle said, and are being reproduced using a working proof of concept in a local test environment before being sent.

But he acknowledged the volume is creating problems of its own.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/08/06/bitcoin-developers-flag-85-critical-bugs-in-an-extremely-bad-situation

While you may be correct about this in the sense that we have to work on protecting the existing infrastructure in the light of the speed up of penetrative analysis, the article that you are quoting is in no way better than the quantum FUD articles. It is taking a situation and then exaggerating it for some clout as they say these days, the "situation is extremely bad" -- he can GTFO with his bullshit. All these tools can do is speed up discovery and nothing more, but in the same way they can speed up defenses. Instead there is a lesson to be had here, that these tools should be adopted ASAP by everyone for scanning their own projects before someone else gets the idea. Furthermore:

1) Most detection by AI are false, they intentionally hide this statistics for marketing reasons and the stupid public believes them. Many users here already believe that AI has "god-like" power.
2) Most exploits can not be exploited except under very difficult conditions, even if they are critical or high severity issues.
3) Proper practices of using a hardware wallet with a passphrase defends against most of these attacks, if not all of them.

Quantum FUD turned into AI FUD. Give it a couple of years and they will again return with quantum FUD.  

[bbc.reporter]

@Satofan44. However, this is presently proving that it is becoming much easier to discover bugs in opensource software by hackers and cyber criminals which creates an argument that because of these increasing discoveries, there will be increasing attacks also.

Another argument might be that opensource will become something that proves that the developers of the project is not bad, however, opensource will not be a protection from discovery of bugs to attack because they are being found faster than the community of developers can fix.

The people that will spend thousands of dollars in AI compute to find these bugs to attack will be the criminals, I reckon.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

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.

Quantum computer FUDs aren't new and they'll always be a reoccurring fear in the industry but that doesn't mean we have to because of this abandon our goals for coming into the market. The chances of this happening in our life time isn't there as of if such technology was already existing then the government would had already used it on Satoshi wallets and probably other well known addresses being linked to prominent names. The whole discussion surrounding this will just continue to be a FUD and never come into reality. There could always be a possibility of something like that happening in the future but just as you said, that shouldn't discourage us from investing and missing out of the opportunity of a lifetime.

[Satofan44]

@Satofan44. However, this is presently proving that it is becoming much easier to discover bugs in opensource software by hackers and cyber criminals which creates an argument that because of these increasing discoveries, there will be increasing attacks also.

You didn't fully understand my point, when tools are widely available like this they do not increase anything at all. There is an incentive to use it for defense purposes, and as soon as it is done then the increased number of discoveries for attackers is cancelled with the increased number of discoveries by those who are doing the defense. There is only a temporary imbalance because defenders do not have an incentive as strong as the attackers from the very beginning, but that tends to erode away very quickly. It would only be a real concern if someone discovered a secret "super tool" that nobody else can access and then is utilizing that tool against everyone, by which such an entity maintains its advantage. There is no such tool, relax.

Another argument might be that opensource will become something that proves that the developers of the project is not bad, however, opensource will not be a protection from discovery of bugs to attack because they are being found faster than the community of developers can fix.

False, fixing most of these security bugs is trivial. Only those that require big overhauls are difficult, but usually they relate to issues that are also hard to exploit.

The people that will spend thousands of dollars in AI compute to find these bugs to attack will be the criminals, I reckon.

What about it? Most criminals are not able to weaponize most exploits. Just because someone discovers something, that does not necessarily mean that they can use it or that it can be used at all.

[bbc.reporter]

@Satofan44. Heheheheee it is a very headshaking assumption to declare that everything will be safe under the age where AI can find software bugs much more easily than a community of opensource developers. Also, who will spend thousands of dollars to find all of these bugs, find the weaknesses and steal cryptocoins? It will be the criminals. Much of the opensource development community who do not have a financial motivation to do this will not spend thousands of dollars from their own pocket to do this heheheeh.

In any case, this man tried AI to test this if it can find the bug on Coldcard wallet. It found the bug in minutes! How many more of these types of bugs are out there?



Many people simply trust open source because it’s publicly visible and therefore must be secure.
Unfortunately, this is not the case.
Recently it became known that the Coldcard hardware wallet had a serious vulnerability for years. The bug was sitting right there in the open source code. Still, no one found it for a long time. Until someone pointed AI at it.
That made me think.
I can’t really read C or C++ code myself. Most of us can’t. But modern AI can. And attackers are already using it.
So I did the following:
I first applied an AI workflow to the source code of the Coldcard hardware wallet, which was known to have a serious flaw. The AI found the bug within minutes — without being told beforehand what to look for. So the workflow was fundamentally useful.
Then I applied the exact same workflow to my own hardware wallet.
Result: No comparable serious vulnerability found.
This reassures me for now. But it doesn’t mean everything is absolutely safe.
It only shows that you should at least check the source code seriously once, instead of just trusting it.
The old Bitcoin motto “Don’t trust. Verify.” could never really be taken seriously by most people until now. It simply couldn’t be taken seriously, because without AI the code was practically unreadable for the average user.

Source https://www.linkedin.com/posts/felixsc_github-felixsc1walletsafetyeval-activity-7490043788669743105-ZLKZ

[Oasisman]

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.

The chances of this happening in our life time isn't there as of if such technology was already existing then the government would had already used it on Satoshi wallets and probably other well known addresses being linked to prominent names. The whole discussion surrounding this will just continue to be a FUD and never come into reality. There could always be a possibility of something like that happening in the future but just as you said, that shouldn't discourage us from investing and missing out of the opportunity of a lifetime.

This is what the people who fall for this FUD fail to realize. Even if the powerful quantum computer comes into existence, we wouldn't be alive anymore when that happens as it would take decades before this can be fully developed.
Also, Bitcoin isn't the only thing at risk. Banking and financial systems, government systems, and other payments systems are far more at risks than Bitcoin.

We shouldn't really worry about the current FUD/risks of the powerful quantum computer, because that is a kind of problem far in the future, which will eventually have solutions.

[Satofan44]

@Satofan44. Heheheheee it is a very headshaking assumption to declare that everything will be safe under the age where AI can find software bugs much more easily than a community of opensource developers. Also, who will spend thousands of dollars to find all of these bugs, find the weaknesses and steal cryptocoins? It will be the criminals. Much of the opensource development community who do not have a financial motivation to do this will not spend thousands of dollars from their own pocket to do this heheheeh.

In any case, this man tried AI to test this if it can find the bug on Coldcard wallet. It found the bug in minutes! How many more of these types of bugs are out there?

You don't seem to understand AI or the point of my post. AI is not sentient, it does not just go and do whatever the fuck it would do if it were sentient. It is a tool that can be effectively used in targeted ways. This means that everyone who is able to use these tools can use them according to what they want to do. In the case of the Coldcard wallet, it was simply someone who is an enemy that used an AI to look for the vulnerability first. But it was equally possible that someone from the defender side could have used it to find the vulnerability and get it patched before the exploit.

For each big vulnerability that is exposed like this, you do not see the hundreds and thousands that were patched before they could be exploited. If AI is able to speed up attackers significantly, then it is equally able to speed up the defenders. That is the point of the post, and it is factually true. There is absolutely no reason why the attacking side would be faster with the use of AI when compared to defenders using AI. To understand something reasonable you need to have sufficient knowledge in regards to its effects, the AI FUD is very similar to the quantum FUD -- people who don't know better think that we are like helpless sheep and that doomsday is coming. Surely there are going to be various challenges relating to that, but they will be overcome with different methods.

[bbc.reporter]

@Satofan44. Heheheheee it is a very headshaking assumption to declare that everything will be safe under the age where AI can find software bugs much more easily than a community of opensource developers. Also, who will spend thousands of dollars to find all of these bugs, find the weaknesses and steal cryptocoins? It will be the criminals. Much of the opensource development community who do not have a financial motivation to do this will not spend thousands of dollars from their own pocket to do this heheheeh.

In any case, this man tried AI to test this if it can find the bug on Coldcard wallet. It found the bug in minutes! How many more of these types of bugs are out there?

You don't seem to understand AI or the point of my post. AI is not sentient, it does not just go and do whatever the fuck it would do if it were sentient. It is a tool that can be effectively used in targeted ways. This means that everyone who is able to use these tools can use them according to what they want to do. In the case of the Coldcard wallet, it was simply someone who is an enemy that used an AI to look for the vulnerability first. But it was equally possible that someone from the defender side could have used it to find the vulnerability and get it patched before the exploit.

For each big vulnerability that is exposed like this, you do not see the hundreds and thousands that were patched before they could be exploited. If AI is able to speed up attackers significantly, then it is equally able to speed up the defenders. That is the point of the post, and it is factually true. There is absolutely no reason why the attacking side would be faster with the use of AI when compared to defenders using AI. To understand something reasonable you need to have sufficient knowledge in regards to its effects, the AI FUD is very similar to the quantum FUD -- people who don't know better think that we are like helpless sheep and that doomsday is coming. Surely there are going to be various challenges relating to that, but they will be overcome with different methods.

It appears that your head is not listening heheheh. In opensource development, much these contributors are working for free with their free time because their motivation is not financial. They will not spend thousands of American dollars from their own pocket to use AI to defend against the hackers. However, criminals will certainly pay for thousands of dollars to use AI to attack and steal because they know there is a chance that their investment will pay more than what they paid to use AI.

[Satofan44]

It appears that your head is not listening heheheh. In opensource development, much these contributors are working for free with their free time because their motivation is not financial. They will not spend thousands of American dollars from their own pocket to use AI to defend against the hackers. However, criminals will certainly pay for thousands of dollars to use AI to attack and steal because they know there is a chance that their investment will pay more than what they paid to use AI.

False. Most Bitcoin Core main contributors are well funded and they have more resources than most attackers. Therefore your claim is invalid. I don't care about other projects, or the pajeets from this forum -- most users here don't know anything about large sums of money at all. Don't be like that and stop insisting on your wrong beliefs.

[arzuo]

Since you mentioned the update, it seems that the time required for the update process is risky.

If that were the case, someone would try to invent a new crypto by reviewing its structure on a quantum-capable quantum computer. In that case, a layer of Bitcoin or something related to it could be created, whereby users of old Bitcoin who have not yet updated would accept that update process.
If there is a way like the above method, it will definitely be discovered. Experts need to work on this now.

Also, I feel like there is an attempt to trap Bitcoin in a great trap/Fud with quantum computers.

[#CapsLOck]

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.

Quantum computer FUDs aren't new and they'll always be a reoccurring fear in the industry but that doesn't mean we have to because of this abandon our goals for coming into the market. The chances of this happening in our life time isn't there as of if such technology was already existing then the government would had already used it on Satoshi wallets and probably other well known addresses being linked to prominent names. The whole discussion surrounding this will just continue to be a FUD and never come into reality. There could always be a possibility of something like that happening in the future but just as you said, that shouldn't discourage us from investing and missing out of the opportunity of a lifetime.

I'm not against talking about Quantum FUD, but I feel like it's sometimes over-inflated. A potent quantum computer may pose a true threat to older exposed Bitcoin addresses at some point in the future but this is not to make the rest of the network suddenly unusable. If the threat becomes viable then Bitcoin's protocol can evolve. I do agree that its not a good idea to panic sell on something that may be years or decades away. The best thing to do is to keep your eye on the technology, understand the risk and not be afraid to invest, but rather make a sensible investment decision.

[bbc.reporter]

It appears that your head is not listening heheheh. In opensource development, much these contributors are working for free with their free time because their motivation is not financial. They will not spend thousands of American dollars from their own pocket to use AI to defend against the hackers. However, criminals will certainly pay for thousands of dollars to use AI to attack and steal because they know there is a chance that their investment will pay more than what they paid to use AI.

False. Most Bitcoin Core main contributors are well funded and they have more resources than most attackers. Therefore your claim is invalid. I don't care about other projects, or the pajeets from this forum -- most users here don't know anything about large sums of money at all. Don't be like that and stop insisting on your wrong beliefs.

I am talking about all of opensource projects, big and small. If you are a smart man who has an objective mind, you cannot reject reality that AI is changing the development of software much quicker than before. The hackers can find more security errors more faster and attack this quicker than the defenders unless they will also spend thousands of dollars to fix these software and security errors.

If you declare that AI cannot find these errors much quicker, I will say that you are very much mistaken heheheh.

[d5000]

[...] the hackers can find more security errors more faster and attack this quicker than the defenders unless they will also spend thousands of dollars to fix these software and security errors.

I question this assumption:

- The hackers do not know the projects well, so they have to search the needle in a haystack. The developers can focus on their own project only. They can scan incrementally, which means much less resources. So basically the big leap would be to check the current version. Then all subsequent versions are much cheaper to check. Yes, the Red Team needed thousands of dollars, but they also checked hundreds of projects.
- There is the concept of "joint defense". Open source projects that are used by companies, can pool resources (AI tokens) from these companies to detect vulnerabilities.
- AI can also write automated test suites, which simulate the software's features. This task was often taken a bit lightly by some open source projects because it is boring, but now it can be written quite quick.
- Developers can pre-check their code on their airgapped machines with local AI before publishing the commits.

So I think the defenders are structurally in advantage, and thus I think open source, once this first wave is over, will get much better and safer.

[spiker777]

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

I'm not gonna claim on being an expert part of your statement,  However AFAIK, BTC and that other coin both are equally at risk IF a magical QC suddenly surfaces.

QC has been in work for years. There is no magic in it. And it will not surface suddenly. it will take years to be fully functional and ready to use. The risks are real, so we should be prepared for them too.

Quantum FUD? It is funny how we have gotten to the stage where even Bitcoin enthusiasts are now predicting the downfall of Bitcoin.

The author of the article is definitely not a Bitcoin enthusiast, bro. he is clearly an Ethereum enthusiast and already a Bitcoin hater.

[bbc.reporter]

[...] the hackers can find more security errors more faster and attack this quicker than the defenders unless they will also spend thousands of dollars to fix these software and security errors.

I question this assumption:

- The hackers do not know the projects well, so they have to search the needle in a haystack. The developers can focus on their own project only. They can scan incrementally, which means much less resources. So basically the big leap would be to check the current version. Then all subsequent versions are much cheaper to check. Yes, the Red Team needed thousands of dollars, but they also checked hundreds of projects.
- There is the concept of "joint defense". Open source projects that are used by companies, can pool resources (AI tokens) from these companies to detect vulnerabilities.
- AI can also write automated test suites, which simulate the software's features. This task was often taken a bit lightly by some open source projects because it is boring, but now it can be written quite quick.
- Developers can pre-check their code on their airgapped machines with local AI before publishing the commits.

So I think the defenders are structurally in advantage, and thus I think open source, once this first wave is over, will get much better and safer.

Yes, this is cat and mouse and this will certainly be good for security and development. However, when has any open source software development project to be perfect? There will always be security errors and in the world where AI is becoming more powerful, we should certainly not underestimate the power that this is giving to the hackers also.

Lazarus of North Korea has stolen billions from the cryptospace using a combination of computer hacking and social engineering. Would you argue that they will be stopped 100% in the world where they can use AI? This will be a headshaking declaration.

[d5000]

However, when has any open source software development project to be perfect? There will always be security errors and in the world where AI is becoming more powerful, we should certainly not underestimate the power that this is giving to the hackers also.

It will tend to the same equilibrium than today. Lazy open source projects with bad security practices will have few users, and thus hackers won't be able to steal much from them. Maybe sometimes they get lucky (like they already did with Coldcard), but most of the time, those projects with many users will need to use the best tools to avoid vulnerabilities, and in this case, AI tools.

Bitcoin Red Team uses local AI now and were very successful with that approach, so there is not always the need to waste money on tokens (you need computing power / storage but that is probably much cheaper if you join forces and use it for the long term).

Regarding social engineering, this is now also quite well known, and thus it will also become a standard security practice to always double or triple check commits by unknown developers with different AI models.

IMO we're currently (next 3-4 months) in the most dangerous time because while the high profile projects are already alert (and Red Team has checked them) many small and mid-sized projects probably have still not adapted and thus are vulnerable, but in a year, the new equilibrium (every serious FOSS project will use AI checks) should be already in place.

[Satofan44]

[...] the hackers can find more security errors more faster and attack this quicker than the defenders unless they will also spend thousands of dollars to fix these software and security errors.

I question this assumption:

- The hackers do not know the projects well, so they have to search the needle in a haystack. The developers can focus on their own project only. They can scan incrementally, which means much less resources. So basically the big leap would be to check the current version. Then all subsequent versions are much cheaper to check. Yes, the Red Team needed thousands of dollars, but they also checked hundreds of projects.
- There is the concept of "joint defense". Open source projects that are used by companies, can pool resources (AI tokens) from these companies to detect vulnerabilities.
- AI can also write automated test suites, which simulate the software's features. This task was often taken a bit lightly by some open source projects because it is boring, but now it can be written quite quick.
- Developers can pre-check their code on their airgapped machines with local AI before publishing the commits.

So I think the defenders are structurally in advantage, and thus I think open source, once this first wave is over, will get much better and safer.

The assumption is completely false and this is what happens when you have people who are not technology experts giving "opinions" on technology matters. If one has actually worked in either the side of the attackers or the defenders in recent times, then one would know easily that throwing crazy amounts of money on tokens does not provide good results. The majority of holes to be exploited or holes to be patched, depending on which side you are one, are found in the initial scanning phases for cheap cost -- assuming that the prompting/scanning is done properly. Whoever wants to make extraordinary claims regarding the current or future state of cybersecurity needs to provide substantial evidence for said claims, otherwise they are just spreading low-level misinformation as FUD. The facts regarding the recent exploits are:

1) They did not require high sophistication to be found and utilized.
2) They did not require high AI expenses to be found.
3) They do not change the field in any way from what it already was.

Regarding social engineering, this is now also quite well known, and thus it will also become a standard security practice to always double or triple check commits by unknown developers with different AI models.

This is literally even a joke to bring it up as a real threat. Even without AI, commits from unknown developers are extremely subject to scrutiny and review before they have any chance of being accepted.

IMO we're currently (next 3-4 months) in the most dangerous time because while the high profile projects are already alert (and Red Team has checked them) many small and mid-sized projects probably have still not adapted and thus are vulnerable, but in a year, the new equilibrium (every serious FOSS project will use AI checks) should be already in place.

We are in a confirmation bias phase. For each success exploit, nobody sees the thousands that have failed using AI models. Therefore, illiterate normies believe that AI supremacy is just around the corner. Meanwhile the success rate of AI tools in terms of exploits per prompts ratio is not even 0.01%. 

[bbc.reporter]

News update.

There were 2 hacks where this had the possibility that AI was used. The Liquid network hack and the Harmony blockchain hack.

These hackers appear to be calling themselves white hat hackers heheeheh. I speculate that they do this to avoid the government from finding them and putting them in prison. Also, similar to the actions of white hat hackers, they will return some of the stolen funds and get some for themselves hehe.

In any case, it very much appears that the speculation that AI is making hacking more easier and more accessible to many people is becoming more real!