quantumcomputers

The Quantum Horizon: Bitcoin’s Strategy to Defuse the Cryptographic Time Bomb
The intersection of quantum computing and decentralized finance has long been a subject of speculative fiction and academic rigor. However, the conversation shifted from the theoretical to the actionable on February 15, 2026, when Bitcoin developers officially merged BIP 360 into the Bitcoin Improvement Proposals repository. This milestone represents more than just a code update; it is the first formal architectural step toward shielding the world’s most valuable digital asset from the "Y2K of cryptography."
As developers lay this groundwork, a fierce debate is erupting among computer scientists, cryptographers, and industry veterans regarding the proximity of the threat. While some experts warn of a "cryptographically relevant" quantum computer arriving within five years, others argue that the fundamental physical limitations of qubits mean Bitcoin may remain secure for decades.
The Technical Fix: BIP 360 and the P2MR Solution
At the heart of this recent breakthrough is BIP 360, co-authored by cryptographic researcher Ethan Heilman. The proposal introduces a new output type known as Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR). To understand why P2MR is necessary, one must understand a specific vulnerability introduced—ironically—by one of Bitcoin’s most successful upgrades: Taproot.
The Taproot Paradox
Activated in 2021, Taproot (BIP 341) was hailed for improving Bitcoin's privacy and efficiency. It introduced "key-path spending," allowing a user to spend coins by providing a single signature. However, this process requires the user to reveal their public key on the blockchain.
In a pre-quantum world, this is perfectly safe. But in a post-quantum world, a public key is a roadmap to a private key. Using Shor’s Algorithm, a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could factor the mathematical problems underlying Bitcoin’s Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA), deriving a private key from a public key in minutes.
How P2MR Shields the Network
BIP 360 addresses this by effectively "turning off" the key-path spending feature in certain contexts. By disabling the mechanism that exposes the public key before a transaction is finalized, P2MR preserves the integrity of the script without leaving the digital "front door" unlocked.
"The key spend is not quantum-safe because it exposes the public key," Heilman explained. "A quantum attacker could attack the key spend and steal your funds, even if the script spend was totally safe." By implementing P2MR, Bitcoin creates a "clean slate" upon which post-quantum signature schemes—such as those based on lattices or hash-based cryptography—can be layered in future soft forks.
The Diverging Timelines: When Will the Threat Arrive?
While the technical solution is beginning to take shape, the industry is split on the urgency of its implementation. The disagreement centers on how quickly quantum hardware can scale from experimental lab toys to machines capable of breaking 256-bit encryption.
The Five-Year Warning
The more alarmist view (or perhaps the more realistic one, depending on your perspective) comes from figures like Thomas Rosenbaum, President of Caltech. During a recent public forum, Rosenbaum suggested that the era of fault-tolerant quantum computing is much closer than the general public realizes.
"We will, I believe, create a functioning, fault-tolerant quantum computer in five to seven years," Rosenbaum stated. His confidence is backed by recent laboratory successes. In late 2025, Caltech researchers managed to keep 6,000 qubits coherent with a staggering 99.98% accuracy. Meanwhile, IBM recently demonstrated a 120-qubit entangled state, the largest and most stable of its kind. If these growth curves remain exponential, the "Quantum Eve" for Bitcoin could arrive by the early 2030s.
The Decades-Long Skepticism
Conversely, many within the Bitcoin "cypherpunk" community, including Casa CSO Jameson Lopp, believe the alarm is premature. Lopp points out that we are currently "several orders of magnitude away" from a cryptographically relevant machine.
For a quantum computer to break Bitcoin, it doesn't just need thousands of qubits; it needs millions of logical qubits to account for error correction. Lopp argues that if innovation follows a linear path rather than a "breakthrough" path, the threat is likely two or three decades away.
The NIST Standards and Global Migration
The Bitcoin community isn't operating in a vacuum. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been working on post-quantum cryptography (PQC) standards for years. Their current targets for global infrastructure migration stretch into the mid-2030s.
For Bitcoin, the challenge is not just choosing a standard, but ensuring that the standard is "light" enough to run on a decentralized blockchain. Post-quantum signatures are notoriously larger than ECDSA signatures. If Bitcoin were to adopt a standard like Dilithium or Falcon today, the size of the blockchain could balloon, making it harder for regular users to run full nodes—a direct threat to decentralization.
The Ossification Risk: A Hidden Danger
Perhaps the most insightful point in the current debate comes from Jameson Lopp regarding the "ossification" of Bitcoin. As the network grows in value and the number of stakeholders increases, reaching a "rough consensus" for major upgrades becomes exponentially more difficult.
"It's the nature of network protocols to ossify over time," Lopp noted. "What it really means is that it becomes harder and harder to reach consensus in a decentralized network."
If the Bitcoin community waits until a quantum threat is imminent to begin the upgrade process, the bureaucratic and social friction of the network might prevent a fix from being deployed in time. This is why the merge of BIP 360 is so critical today; it begins the review process while the "sun is still shining," allowing for years of testing before the code is ever activated.
The Strategic Perspective: Is the Fear Justified?
There is a final school of thought that views the quantum threat as a secondary concern. Some analysts argue that if a state-level actor (the only entities currently capable of building such machines) achieved quantum supremacy, they wouldn't start by attacking Bitcoin wallets.
Instead, they would likely target:
Classified Government Communications: The ability to read "top secret" traffic from the last 20 years.Centralized Banking Systems: The backbone of the legacy financial world.Nuclear Command and Control: The ultimate strategic advantage.
In this context, Bitcoin—with its transparent ledger and active developer community—might actually be one of the most resilient systems. If a quantum attack occurred, the network could theoretically "checkpoint" the ledger and move to a new, post-quantum chain, effectively "burning" the stolen coins in a hard fork.
Conclusion: Uncertainty as a Catalyst
The merge of BIP 360 marks the end of the "denial" phase of Bitcoin's quantum journey. Whether the threat is five years away or fifty, the developers are signaling that Bitcoin will not be caught off guard.
Ethan Heilman sums up the prevailing developer sentiment: "I treat it very much like something which is uncertain... It is important for Bitcoin to be valuable, useful, and take existential risks seriously, even if there is some uncertainty over how dangerous they actually are."
By building the "Merkle-Root" framework now, Bitcoin is essentially installing the plumbing for a post-quantum future. When the day comes that a quantum computer can finally factor a 256-bit prime, Bitcoin will be ready to flip the switch, ensuring that the "digital gold" remains secure for the next century of computation.
#bitcoinquantum #quantumcomputers $BTC

Face aux risques posé par l'algorithme Shor de l'ordinateur quantique,le BIP-360 est une solution pour protéger certaines transaction bitcoin.Il ne s'agit pas là d'une solution magique définitive mais d'une première pour se protéger contre les attaques quantique.
En effet, l'algorithme Shor que possède les ordinateurs quantiques aurait la possibilité de briser le système cryptographique utilisé par BTC rendant certaines adresses vulnérables.
Certains développeurs de Bitcoin pensent que le danger de ces ordinateurs est encore très loin et pas vraiment inquiétant pour le moment.Mais d'autres se demandent si le réseau pourra réagir à temps si la menace devient réelle.
Pour aller plus loin : l'informatique quantique pourrait t'elle faire tomber le Bitcoin ?
Malgres le scepticisme de certains développeurs, d'autres on déjà commencé à travailler sur le sujet et proposent déjà des solutions.
Parmis les différentes types de transaction Bitcoin,les plus anciens comme celles des adresses P2PK et P2MS sont particulièrement à risque,car elles exposent directement les clés publiques sur la blokchain.Un ordinateurs quantique suffisamment avancé pourrait alors,en théorie,en déduire la clé privée et accéder aux fonds.
Les adresses Taproot utilisent des clés publiques modifiée (Tweakées),ce qui peut les rendre vulnérables. C'est justement pour renforcer leur sécurité que le BIP-360 a été proposé.
Son objectif est de rendre le protocole beaucoup plus résistant aux attaques quantiques dites " à exposition longue ",qui visent des clés publiques visible sur la blokchain. Celà concerne surtout les anciennes adresses contenant des fonds inactifs comme les 1.12 Millions de BTC appartenant à Satoshi Nakamoto.
Pourquoi le BIP-360 ne suffit-il pas ?
Même si le BIP-360 ameliore la résistance du BTC face aux menaces de machines quantiques,il ne suffit pas à lui seule. il ne protège que en effet contre les attaques à exposition longue sur les transactions Taproot c'est à dire celle visant des clés publiques déjà visibles sur la blokchain.
Cependant,la plupart des transactions Bitcoin dévoile leur clés publiques dès qu'elles sont diffusé dans le mempool( liste des transactions en attente )ce qui les expose aux attaques à " exposition courtes " Dans ce cas,un ordinateur quantique assez rapide pourrait découvrir la clés privée et voler avant que la transaction ne soit confirmée.
Par ailleurs, certaines adresses contiennent des BTC dont les clés publiques sont déjà connues, mais leur propriétaire ont perdu leur clés privée. Le BIP-360 ne peut rien faire pour ces fonds,car la clé publique est déjà exposée et le risque existe déjà.
#quantumcomputers #blokchain $BTC $INIT

Is Bitcoin Really Under Threat?
Headlines scream about quantum computers breaking Bitcoin, but the reality is far less dramatic. Only a tiny fraction of BTC is exposed, and practical danger is decades away.
still, like Ethereum today, Bitcoin’s strength is often invisible. When technology works perfectly and the network runs smoothly, the market doesn’t cheer — it just ignores it. That’s exactly what can make the next big move explosive.
How Bitcoin Could Be Vulnerable — And Why It Isn’t
Bitcoin relies on two cryptographic pillars:
ECDSA + Schnorr signatures
SHA-256 hashing
Quantum computers could theoretically attack these. But only 1.6 million BTC in legacy addresses are exposed — and just 10,200 BTC could realistically move markets.
Even if a quantum hacker existed today, cracking these wallets would take years per address. Panic is unnecessary — just like traders ignore Ethereum’s upgrades even when fees drop and Layer 1 activity surges.
The Quantum Computing Reality Check
Modern quantum computers are far from powerful enough.Google’s Willow has 105 qubits; breaking Bitcoin in a day would need 13 million — 100,000× stronger.
Experts predict cryptographically relevant quantum computers won’t appear until the 2030s or later.
So the immediate threat? None.
And the psychological threat? That’s another story.
Emotional Truth: Technology vs Market Attention
Traders often forget that real progress doesn’t guarantee instant price action.
Look at Ethereum:
Fees droppedThroughput increasedL1 activity returnedETH continued burning
Yet price barely moves. The market no longer hypes what “just works.”
Bitcoin is similar. Its architecture and defensive upgrades are solid, but traders fear headlines more than they appreciate stability.
This is the invisible stage where future wealth is being quietly built, unseen by the crowd. Patience beats panic.
Why This Matters to Traders
Ignore the hype, focus on fundamentals — BTC’s security is solid.Understand psychology — markets often ignore good news until scarcity or awareness hits.Risk management still matters — protect funds, diversify addresses, and keep calm.
When the crowd isn’t talking, it’s often the best time to act. Just like Ethereum quietly becoming essential L1 infrastructure, Bitcoin quietly strengthens, unseen — until the next rally.

Conclusion
Quantum threats are decades away, and BTC is far from vulnerable. Only a tiny fraction is at risk, and soft forks allow proactive upgrades.
The bigger lesson? Markets ignore what works. They hype what’s noisy. Bitcoin’s quiet strength, like Ethereum’s silent upgrades, is a signal — the stage is set for long-term gains, but only the patient notice.
$BTC $ETH
#WhaleDeRiskETH #quantumcomputers #quantum

Quantum Computer Explained In Simple Words:
A normal computer uses bits, each bit is either 0 or 1, however quantum computers use qubits. A qubit can be 0 or 1 or both at the same time(this third scenario is called superposition). On top of that, qubits can be linked together in a weird way called Entanglement, meaning changing one can instantly affect the other.
In simple words, A normal computer tries every door one by one, while a quantum computer can try many doors at the same time. That’s why they’re powerful — for certain types of problems. However they are only good at specific mathematical problems, not everything.
Do Quantum Computers Exist Right Now?
Yes, companies like Google, IBM, Microsoft, have built early quantum machines. However, they are extremely unstable, make a lot of errors and require near absolute-zero temperatures. So technically, they are not practical yet. So we are likely decades away from real quantum computers.
Why Do People Say Quantum Computers Threaten Crypto?
Most cryptocurrencies($BTC , $ETH ) rely on Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) and Public-Key Cryptography. A quantum algorithm called Shor’s Algorithm could theoretically derive private keys from public keys and break digital signatures. If that happens, someone could steal coins, wallet security would collapse and Blockchain trust would be shaken.

It’s Not Just Crypto — It’s Everything
If quantum computers break encryption, they don’t just attack Bitcoin. They would also break:
i) Online banking systems

ii) Credit cards

iii) Military communication

iv) Government data

v) HTTPS websites

vi) Email encryption

vii) Cloud security

viii) VPN systems

ix) Stock exchanges

x) Nuclear facility systems

Basically: the entire digital world.

The Myth: “Quantum Will Kill Bitcoin”

This idea is exaggerated because:

i) Most Bitcoin addresses don’t expose their public key until you spend.

If you never move coins, they’re harder to attack.

ii) Developers can upgrade crypto.

Crypto can move to Post-quantum cryptography and Quantum-resistant signature schemes.

iii) The world will see it coming.

Building a large-scale quantum computer cannot be hidden. It would take years of public research. There would be warning signs.

Possible Solutions:

The good news is that developers are already working on the solution before it even hits us. Here are some of possible solutions:

i) Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC)

These are encryption methods designed to resist quantum attacks. The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is already standardizing quantum-resistant algorithms.

ii) Migration Strategy

If quantum computers get close to dangerous levels, Users could transfer coins to quantum-safe wallets

Should Crypto Investors Be Worried?

Right now, we have more serious things to worry about like regulation of cryptocurrencies, market cycles, liquidity, ensuring proper security of your accounts, poor risk management. There is a famous saying, “Don’t Count Your Chickens Before They Hatch”. So this quantum risk has not even hatched and we are counting it.

Final Thoughts:

Quantum computers are real and very powerful in theory. However, they are most likely to advance medicine, improve material science and optimize logistics. They are very unlikely to come into wrong hands because they could be more precious than nuclear technology.
#quantumcomputers

Quantum computing is often framed as an existential threat to Bitcoin, but that framing skips over how far the technology still has to go.

Key Takeaways
Quantum computing is a long-term issue, not an immediate threat to Bitcoin.Current quantum hardware is far too weak to break Bitcoin’s security.Bitcoin can gradually upgrade its cryptography if the risk becomes real.
An analysis from digital asset manager CoinShares suggests that the discussion is less about imminent danger and more about long-term preparation for a system that now safeguards trillions of dollars in value.
Where Bitcoin’s defenses actually stand
Bitcoin’s security model is more nuanced than many critics assume. Most coins sit in modern address types that keep public keys hidden until funds are spent. Without access to those public keys, even an advanced attacker would have nothing to exploit. Only a narrow slice of older addresses behaves differently, which naturally limits the scale of any potential vulnerability.
The real constraint is not theory, but hardware. To threaten Bitcoin in practice, quantum computers would need millions of stable, error-corrected qubits. Today’s machines operate with a fraction of that capacity and struggle with reliability. Even optimistic projections place such capabilities well into the future, leaving a wide window for the Bitcoin ecosystem to adapt.
Why time works in Bitcoin’s favor
That extended timeline matters because Bitcoin is not frozen in place. Its open-source structure allows developers to introduce new cryptographic standards as threats evolve. If quantum computing advances to a meaningful level, quantum-resistant signature schemes can be rolled out through gradual network upgrades rather than emergency fixes.
Even under a scenario where quantum progress accelerates, analysts expect no abrupt shock to the market. Any coins that could become exposed would do so slowly, giving holders time to move funds. As a result, liquidity effects would likely unfold over years, not days or weeks.
The risk of moving too fast
CoinShares also flags a different danger: acting prematurely. Forcing major protocol changes before they are necessary could introduce bugs, complexity, or network fragmentation. A cautious, phased approach allows Bitcoin to strengthen its defenses without creating new problems in the process.
Quantum computing remains a topic worth monitoring, but not one that demands alarm. The technology is still distant, Bitcoin’s current exposure is limited, and the network is built to evolve. For now, quantum risk sits firmly in the category of long-term engineering challenges rather than immediate threats to Bitcoin’s security or credibility.
#quantumcomputers

Quantum computers are considered one of the most promising technologies of the future. They promise computing power far beyond that of classical computers. However, this revolution could also pose a threat to modern cryptography—and thus to systems like Bitcoin.
The critical question is: Can quantum computers break Bitcoin? And if so, will Bitcoin need an upgrade?
How Quantum Computers Threaten Cryptography
The security of modern cryptography relies on mathematical problems that are difficult for classical computers to solve. Bitcoin primarily uses two algorithms:
1. SHA-256 (for hash functions)
2. ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm, for digital signatures)
Quantum computers could specifically attack ECDSA using Shor’s Algorithm, which can break elliptic curve cryptography. In theory, this would allow an attacker to derive private keys from public addresses—a nightmare scenario for Bitcoin.
Does This Also Affect SHA-256?
Fortunately, SHA-256 (and similar hash functions) are only minimally vulnerable to quantum attacks. Grover’s Algorithm could theoretically cut search times in half, but even then, attacking Bitcoin mining or transaction hashes would be extremely resource-intensive.
Is Bitcoin Really at Risk?
The good news: Not anytime soon.
1. Quantum computers are not yet powerful enough
- Current quantum computers have only a few error-prone qubits.
1. Breaking ECDSA would require thousands of error-corrected qubits—something that is still years or decades away.
2. Bitcoin transactions are often "quantum-resistant"
- As long as Bitcoin addresses are used only once (as recommended), the risk is low.
- Only publicly known addresses (e.g., unused funds in old wallets) would be vulnerable.
3. The community can adapt
- If quantum computers become a real threat, Bitcoin can upgrade to quantum-resistant cryptography (e.g., Lamport signatures or lattice-based cryptography).
Will Bitcoin Need an Upgrade? Long-term: Yes.
Once quantum computers become practically viable, Bitcoin will need to update its signature algorithms. However, progress is slow enough that the community will have time to respond.
Possible Solutions:
- Post-quantum cryptography (e.g., XMSS, SPHINCS+)
- Schnorr signatures (already part of Bitcoin’s protocol, offering better scalability and serving as a foundation for quantum-resistant upgrades)
- Hybrid systems (combining ECDSA with quantum-resistant signatures)
Conclusion: Bitcoin is (Still) Safe
Quantum computers pose a potential threat, but not an immediate one. Bitcoin developers have time to prepare, and promising quantum-resistant solutions already exist.
Bitcoin won’t be cracked overnight—but the community must stay vigilant. Once quantum computing makes significant advances, an upgrade will be necessary. Until then, the network remains secure.

Further Topics:
- Post-quantum cryptography
- Quantum-Resistant Ledger (QRL)
- Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) for quantum security
#quantumcomputers #Cryptography
$BTC