Ballet wallets seem to be a bit more secure for long term storage due to the 2 part redemption process and the card needing to be in hand to withdraw? Please correct me if I am wrong

I think unpeeled coins and paper wallets could still carry a decent value based on the lore and reputation behind their creators and resilence despite being a rather dated medium of storage at present. Obivously we should ideally be storing BTC on hardwallets, etc.

I collect them because I appreciate the portability and artistic expression and also because I like all things bitcoin. These quantum computing articles with their prognostications seem to pop up every couple of months and I'm really not worried especially since bitcoin is all software and can be forked as needed (not anytime soon though).

Perhaps those Casascius and Lealana keys won't be safe for an eternity, but it should continue to have a historic value especially if a more secure version is created in the future with the same level of trust that gives it value today.
 

    Exactly!  Time to find another form of storing btc....perhaps a quantum computer can give us a better way to store BTC 

Yes a BIP39 password would make it harder to crack but how much harder?

I feel your pain, all those with loaded coins, notes etc.

There is a great thread over on the Development and Technical Discussion board
concerning QC > https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/5381812.0

As o_e_l_e_o quoted Satoshi in that thread, we would just move to a quantum
resistant algorithm but that wont solve the "to peel or not to peel" issue.

We GM long before that. Funds don't matter for us then. We collect for the collection not the funds.

Right now a quantum computer is as big as a gymnasium. The amount of heat they generate is the biggest problem. When they do get it all figured out. It wont be something we all have. There will be like 2 or 3 quantum computers on the planet. Definitely not worried about my coins being compromised. Like others have said. As quantum improves so will the blockchain technology.

A snapshot and update won't magically make your collectibles' addresses safe.  Bitcoins would have to move to a new address under your scenario, which means collectibles would have to be peeled for their bitcoins to be moved to a new address.  This will cost fees and need to be done BEFORE quantum computers compromise the network, not after.  I don't think not worrying is an option you can have for much longer (they're saying 10 years) without losing all of your bitcoins.  I get that for Bitcoin moving forward it would not be an issue, as they can upgrade the hashing algorithm.  However, it would mark the first time that legacy Bitcoin addresses would become useless, which is a major concern in my opinion.  Then there is also the concern of "satoshi's coins" and what happens once they're stolen by quantum computing.  It's almost as if there's a massive reward available for anyone able to break the encryption.  I don't know if there's any way around the chaos that is coming our way from a technical standpoint regarding legacy addresses, but I do know that it is something currently not being taken seriously by collectors and makers.

I think QC is pretty far away and unless Bitcoin actually replaces a world power's  currency, governments and companies that can afford to run QCs won't be wasting the resources to hack Bitcoin. Isn't the main issue with QC is that they can only be programmed to do very specific tasks/calculations anyways?