If you only exposed your public key that they can try to break and get your private key using QC. But as far as I know, Satoshi or addresses that was associated to him doesn't have any transaction so still going hard to break it.

I think Bitcoin dev's know the threat already and could have already a mitigation plan to move on the next cryptographic algo to protect our Bitcoin address.

As for QC revealing Satoshi, I doubt that it has the capability.

AB would be better off keeping quiet than talking nonsense like this, because by the time quantum computers are capable of breaking through the protection, Satoshi will most likely be dead (although he may still be alive today). It's really a shame that Satoshi didn't burn all the BTC he mined because that would have prevented all the conspiracy theories we hear about all the time.

---

By the way, this is what I call a low value, zero effort, copy-pasted topic that ultimately is not (and will not) serve any meaningful discussion.

Well, to me, Adam Back is not a random guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. Perhaps if there is serious progress in quantum computing, everyone would need to more their assets. To be honest, though, I assumed that if we ever get there, there would be some kind of soft fork rather than individual decisions to switch.
Also, 'maybe 20 years' is very broad and can mean 'never'. People were supposed to go to Mars, grow human clones and many other things in similar timeframes. An answer like that means we're very far from this matter being a serious threat.

This is a very interesting subject. I'm not expert but I think that Satoshi will still not be in a huge danger because if I remember correctly, his public keys are not known.
By the way, it's clear that we will be ready before quantum computing gets developed enough to make a threat for Bitcoin, so, to my mind, this means that satoshi's coins will be treated differently. Also, exclusively his address can be blocked if he doesn't appear. Anyways, I think that satoshi will not return and the quantum attack will not happen in the next 10 years but the heat is here and it's only getting interesting.

I added some snippets to start a conversation, and I subsequently gave my views in the thread. Meanwhile, you keep on responding and kicking this thread up to the top of the list of threads, all the while claiming nothing useful can come of this. I have said, and others have said, that this topic is of interest, and that Adam Back's opinions are more interesting than yours.

Do you have any views on the national security risks of QCs? If so, post them. All you blathered is that Satoshi should have burned his coins, but you failed to provide any meaningful discussion to the threat of QCs to the network.


You're still not adding anything substantial to this discussion. Do you have anything to add about the threat of QCs to the network? By the way, as you respond, you are clearly showing the topic is worthwhile in some sense - by kicking it up to the top. Yet you fail to contribute in any meaningful way. Others have contributed.

Satoshi Nakamoto doesn't wish to be known. It has been a waste of effort over the years by some people trying hard to uncover who Satoshi truly is. Satoshi's creation is still serving its purpose, even without his identity being known. It's high time we all let the search for Satoshi rest. Threads like this will keep coming up over and over again yet we still won't figure out who Satoshi is.

No they are known especially the spent P2PKH and both spent and unspent P2PK (Here the public key is included in the blockchain for unspent output).
Many addresses in the early days of Bitcoin made used of such addresses.
Though unspent outputs from P2PKH are relatively safe from Quantum computing
but same can't be said about the others i.e Spent P2PKH and spent and unspent outputs of P2PK.

The difference is the one with H is hashed. Pay to public key (P2PK).