'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. 

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.

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/

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.

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.

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

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. 

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.

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.

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.

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