Not going to happen.

Those quantum computers will be expensive when released (a few years from now), not available for common people.
And when these computers are being adopted, signing schemes and cryptography are going to be improved as well.

Quantum computers were first being thought by the CIA and now Google and IBM are also racing and competing to release a quantum computer. Quantum computers are supercomputers and can solve algorithms a thousand times faster than normal computers. But let us say that if the masses are now using quantum computers will it be the end of bitcoin, the answer is not. If the technology is improving cyber security is also improving and that is why our bitcoins are still protected when the time comes.

Nothing gona happen like this because it is not easy as you are thinking. Those quantam computers won't be available for common people as its price will be out of reach for the common people. Without this signing schemes and cryptography will be more secured when this computer will be adopted.

the difference between binary vs quantum. is not about folding space or entring extra multiverses.. its simply to go from 2dimenion(options) to 4dimension(options)

so when you heard them talking about extra dimensions. they were not talking about a multi verse. they were talking about
binary 0 . 1
quandum 0 . 1. 2, 3

imagine it this way
before 0 meant 0volts and 1 meant 1 volt. and by using the patern of voltagelack of voltage peopl could create messages.. (like morse code) which is where binary first developed from.

with quantum its
0 volts, 0.33volts  0.66volts 1 volt which is is less like pulses of electric/noise/data.. but more like waves/sound pitches/data

so instead of just having 0 meaning stand still and 1 being move forward. now using quantum you can have 0.33 as left and 0.66 as right.. or even 0.33 move back and 0.66 as move forward and stand still.

it opens up new possibilities of options within a same transister holding the same maximum voltage as before. but now with a 'dimmer' switch to have different levels that can mean different things.

...
with that said . when trying to solve a binary problem you cannot just use a quantum qbyte to give out a qbyte solution.. because a binary system would not understand that.
and as such a quantum system is limited to its multi option approach to brute forcing because the end goal has to be binary acceptable

so for a binary logic problem it works out that quantum is only 2x faster at solving (sha256 hash)
as for vector problems(ecdsa), well they can be solved faster.
but knowing the maths of how many possible combinations there are. and how many millenia it would take.. even with a quantum computer, its still going to be beyond your great great great grand childs life before an address is bruteforced.

It will never happen... Surely it possible to hack the private but it is not possible to destroy blockchain people designing the quantum computer will design it in a way that it will be use in a legal way or what do you think?

I hear a lot of people talking about this, but the truth is that this is not really a problem. There are several coins out there that should be safe against quantum computers. I know bitcoin is not one of them, but if the solution is already known, then developers will make the necessary improvements to the network if necessary. I think this is not an issue, and that is the only reason why an update wasn't released yet. If it ever becomes a problem, maybe in three years from now like you mentioned, then developers will address it before it causes any harm.

So, you think that something that can't happen will break Bitcoin? Your words and not mine. Anyone who doesn't understand quantum computers and how Bitcoin works will likely be a little concerned, but honestly the developers will be ready for when this becomes a issue, and encryption will get better due to it anyway. This isn't a realistic concern.

The main thing is quantum computer is not for everyone also it will be released after few years later. Based on this, this computer is expensive also so it is not for general people who will use this computer is very low amount also it will not available for everyone in society. So it is not important or it’s not a matter of headache that it will crack and stole bitcoin because the bitcoin team are very much concern about it and they will find solution very soon also.

Yes I do realize that, and I actually keep saying that myself. For me, one of the greatest advantages over any other crypto out there, besides the obvious in terms of technical aspects, is that for me, they have the best team working on it.

As for my comment, I would like to start by saying that quoting someone and ending his sentence on a comma (without even displaying it) is really not a very good practice as it might induce anyone that reads it in error.

Bitcoin is not quantum attack safe as far as I know, and I will continue saying that I think that is not a problem, because I'm sure that if devs consider that will be an imminent problem for BTC they will focus on that and solve the problem.

There are other coins that are already quantum attack safe. Not an expert here, so I'm just believing in what their devs say. Of course they were not put to the test, so who know if they are safe or not. In theory, these should be some of the safe coins:
QRL – The Quantum Resistant Ledger; NEO; IOTA; and even Cardano is close to that as far as I know.

Are these coins better than BTC? Of course not, and I've never said that. Am I worried that BTC is not quatum safe? Of course not, because like I've said before I believe in bitcoin devs. So if they did not address this yet, it's because they are probably no worried about it right now.