quantumcomputers

Is quantum computing threatening Bitcoin sooner than expected? On Wednesday, Microsoft unveiled its first quantum computing chip, dubbed “Majorana 1.” While the tech community has long speculated about Google’s next-generation quantum effort—often referred to as “Willow”—Microsoft’s announcement places renewed focus on the looming question: Can Bitcoin survive the accelerated push toward million-qubit machines?
Microsoft claims that Majorana 1 leverages a new topological core architecture designed to bring quantum computing out of the lab and into meaningful, real-world applications “in years, rather than in decades.” The chip’s unique design reportedly allows quantum systems to operate for longer periods and at more stable states than previous generations.

According to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, the company’s roadmap points to a one-million-qubit device by around 2027–2029—an ambition many in the field consider necessary for tackling “industrial-scale” computational tasks.
Is Bitcoin At Risk?
While most financial institutions rely on layered security systems, Bitcoin’s reliance on public-key cryptography has many wondering if it could be an easier target for quantum attacks. A Bitcoin-focused financial platform, River, sounded the alarm in a recent X thread, noting that “1 million qubits can potentially crack a BTC address.” They cautioned that “the Majorana 1 chip is far from that scale now, but could reach the 1 million mark by 2027-2029.”

River’s analysis also suggested that a device with 13 to 300 million qubits—once stabilized—could theoretically break a Bitcoin address within hours, potentially placing up to 5.9 million BTC at risk. Though today’s quantum computers are nowhere near that capacity, River stressed that Microsoft’s achievements shorten the overall timeline, meaning Bitcoin developers cannot afford complacency
“When run for several days to weeks, a 1-million qubit QC could potentially crack Bitcoin addresses via a long-range attack. […] More realistically, we’d need a QC with 13-300 million qubits to carry out a long-range attack in 1-8 hours. If achieved, this would put 5.9 million BTC at immediate risk. Remember that the best QCs today have only 1,000 qubits. Still, this breakthrough shortens the timeline to make Bitcoin quantum-resistant,” River writes.
Alexander Leishman, CEO of River, emphasizes in a post on X that BTC’s unique setup could expose it more directly to quantum threats compared to banks and other centralized entities. “Access to a public key equals access to the money,” he said, pointing out that traditional banking systems rely on a host of protective layers. Even if quantum hardware were to render HTTPS encryption obsolete, Leishman noted that hackers would still have to surmount additional firewalls, authentication protocols, and in-person security checks to breach a bank.
In contrast, once a Bitcoin public key has been revealed (as happens when BTC is sent from an address), a sufficiently powerful quantum computer might bypass the corresponding private key if it can run the right algorithm for enough time. Leishman admitted he is “skeptical it’s a near-term problem,” but emphasized that ignoring the quantum threat could be shortsighted.
“A quantum computer will not magically give you access to all of the money at Goldman Sachs. It WILL magically give you access to many billions of dollars worth of Bitcoin. Again, I don’t think this threat is viable any time soon but it’s important that we discuss the issue honestly”, he argues.
Prominent Bitcoin commentator Preston Pysh joined the discussion via X, asking if the community should “prioritize engineering quantum-resistant addresses” and pointing to BIP-360 (the proposed P2QRH framework). Pysh suggested that this proposal could potentially be enacted through a soft fork, a method that typically allows for backward compatibility while adding new features to the Bitcoin protocol.
Leishman agreed that securing Bitcoin against quantum attacks should be a priority, though he urged against rushing any modifications. “We shouldn’t rush anything,” he remarked, signaling a preference for careful research and consensus-building among Bitcoin Core developers and the broader community.
At press time, BTC traded at $98,337.

#quantumcomputers $BTC

Bitcoin, a cryptocurrency, relies on cryptographic algorithms to ensure its security. However, the emergence of quantum computers poses potential threats to Bitcoin's security protocols. In this article, we'll explore the likelihood of quantum computers hacking Bitcoin and the future of cryptocurrencies.
Bitcoin's Security Protocols
The Bitcoin network uses SHA-256 hash function and Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) to secure transactions. These algorithms are considered difficult to break for current classical computers.
Capabilities of Quantum Computers
Quantum computers operate using quantum bits (qubits) and can perform computations by leveraging quantum mechanical properties such as superposition and entanglement. This enables them to calculate multiple possibilities simultaneously, potentially solving certain problems much faster than classical computers.
Quantum Computers and Cryptography
Quantum computers, particularly through the use of Shor's Algorithm, could have superior abilities to factor large numbers into prime factors. This poses a threat to cryptographic algorithms like ECDSA, which rely on prime factors.
Bitcoin Network's Resilience to Quantum Attacks
Currently, it's too early to discuss the practical existence of a quantum computer. However, if such a computer is developed in the future, the Bitcoin network would need to update its security protocols. Transitioning to post-quantum cryptography could be a solution.

While quantum computers theoretically have the potential to hack Bitcoin, practical implementation of this technology is not yet available. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies continue to work towards enhancing their security against future threats.

#Quantum #Bitcoin #BTC #quantumcomputers #blockchain

Concerns Over the Security of Early Bitcoins
Emin Gün Sirer, the CEO of Avalanche, has sparked a debate about the security of bitcoins mined in the early days of the cryptocurrency. He proposed freezing approximately 1 million bitcoins, often associated with pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto, due to potential future threats posed by quantum computing.

Quantum Computing as a Potential Threat
Sirer highlighted that early bitcoins use the outdated Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) cryptographic standard, which exposes public keys and makes these coins more vulnerable to quantum attacks. Unlike modern formats such as Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) or SegWit, P2PK lacks additional layers of security.

He suggested that the Bitcoin community consider freezing these older coins or setting a "sunset date" beyond which they could no longer be spent. This measure, he argued, would protect the integrity of the Bitcoin network from future technological advances.
Quantum Chip Willow and Future Capabilities
Google recently unveiled its quantum chip, Willow, which can perform calculations that would take current supercomputers billions of years to complete. Although Willow is not yet capable of breaking Bitcoin's encryption, it represents a significant step toward practical quantum computing.
Differences Between Modern and Early Bitcoin Addresses
Modern Bitcoin wallets use advanced formats that conceal public keys through hashing. These formats provide added security, as quantum computers would need to reverse the hash, an extremely complex task. In contrast, P2PK addresses store public keys in plain text, making these coins more vulnerable to quantum attacks.
Mixed Reactions to the Proposal
Sirer's proposal has sparked mixed reactions. Some view it as a proactive measure to ensure security, while others argue it contradicts Bitcoin's principles of decentralization and freedom. Critics also highlight the challenges of identifying and freezing specific coins, as well as the potential precedent it could set for future changes to Bitcoin's rules.

Quantum Computing: A Challenge for the Future
Although current quantum computers cannot yet break Bitcoin's encryption, Sirer emphasizes the need for the community to prepare for potential consequences. Quantum technologies are advancing rapidly, and while the threat remains speculative, preventive measures could help mitigate future risks. "Realistic attacks on cryptocurrencies are still far off, but we must closely monitor developments in quantum computing over the coming decades," Sirer concluded.

#CryptoNewss , #Avalanche" , #BTC☀ , #CryptoNewsCommunity , #quantumcomputers

Stay one step ahead – follow our profile and stay informed about everything important in the world of cryptocurrencies!
Notice:
,,The information and views presented in this article are intended solely for educational purposes and should not be taken as investment advice in any situation. The content of these pages should not be regarded as financial, investment, or any other form of advice. We caution that investing in cryptocurrencies can be risky and may lead to financial losses.“

The dark side of using the Super Quantum Chip for AI trading! Here are some potential risks and downsides to consider:

1. *Unprecedented Risk of Market Manipulation*: The Super Quantum Chip's immense processing power could be used to create highly sophisticated market manipulation strategies, potentially destabilizing entire markets.

2. *Existential Risk to Human Traders*: The increased use of Super Quantum Chip-powered AI trading systems could lead to widespread job displacement for human traders, potentially exacerbating social and economic inequalities.

3. *Quantum-Resistant Cryptography Risks*: The Super Quantum Chip's capabilities could potentially break certain types of classical cryptography, compromising the security of financial transactions and sensitive data.

4. *Energy Consumption and Environmental Impact*: The Super Quantum Chip's high energy requirements could contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions, accelerating climate change and associated environmental disasters.

1. *Dependence on Rare Earth Elements*: The production of Super Quantum Chips may rely on rare earth elements, which are often associated with environmentally destructive mining practices and human rights abuses.

2. *Cybersecurity Risks*: The increased complexity of Super Quantum Chip-powered AI trading systems could create new vulnerabilities, potentially allowing malicious actors to compromise these systems and wreak havoc on financial markets.

3. *Lack of Transparency and Accountability*: The use of Super Quantum Chips in AI trading could further obscure the decision-making processes behind trades, making it more challenging to hold individuals and organizations accountable for their actions.
#Write2Earn! r
4. *Unintended Consequences*: The immense power of Super Quantum Chips could lead to unforeseen consequences, such as the creation of unpredictable market dynamics or the amplification of existing biases in financial systems.

5. *Regulatory Challenges*: The emergence of Super Quantum Chip-powered AI trading systems could create significant regulatory challenges, as existing frameworks may be inadequate to address the unique risks and opportunities associated with these technologies.
#quantumcomputers
6. *Existential Risk to Global Financial Stability*: The unchecked development and deployment of Super Quantum Chip-powered AI trading systems could potentially pose an existential risk to global financial stability, as these systems may be capable of generating unprecedented levels of market volatility and instability.

#QC chips are a potential threat to most existing cryptographic systems, including the ones securing many blockchain networks. QC is capable of factoring numbers faster than RSA and elliptic curve cryptography that underpins some of the blockchain security. However, since quantum technology develops rather swiftly, this problem requires some preventive measures in terms of #cybersecurity .
#quantumcomputers use quantum mechanisms to solve problems that will take a classical computer years to solve. For example, the actualization of signature schemes depending on the elliptic curves is dangerous because QC can break it exponentially. This vulnerability encompasses many of the internet protocols on which many blockchains rely, making the call for quantum-resistant solutions timely.
But not all cryptography is threatened. AES in particular and, more specifically, AES-256 continues to generally prove resistant more so given the fact that it is grounded on non-algebraic processes including bit permutation. Unfortunately, today’s quantum computers are not useful in breaking these structures and provide a solid ground for some encrypted methods.
Promising initiatives are already on the way to doing so. Gradually migrating to quantum-safe signatures is becoming part of the blockchains’ development strategies, so they can resist the evolution of QC. It’s crucial to argue that staying ahead of quantum developments allows the projects to prevent future threats that may be detrimental to ecosystems that support projects, thereby protecting users’ trust and system integrity.
This transition to quantum resistance also paves the way to #SocialMining for blockchain communities where people can engage in popularizing the advantages of secure encryption. Through sharing educational posts, making graphics or having general discussions about the effects of QC, the participants propagate the use of quantum-resistant solutions. Social Mining encourages these actions, thus helping to create a synergy for the decentralized world’s defence.
Quantum computing disrupts the existing business models but the threats can be managed once organizations start to act and involve their communities. But as we move into the future of blockchain, being quantum resistant will help safeguard its future, and the trust on which it is built.

Avalanche CEO calls for freezing Satoshi-era million Bitcoins amid quantum computing concerns

Early Bitcoin mined by Satoshi Nakamoto could become vulnerable to quantum computing, says Avalanche’s Emin Gün Sirer, who is urging to consider freezing these coins.
Emin Gün Sirer, the founder of Avalanche avax2.96%Avalanche, sparked debate in a Dec.
10 post on X, proposing to freeze 1 million Bitcoins btc0.53%Bitcoin worth about $97 billion.
These coins, believed to have been mined in Bitcoin’s early days, are often linked to its pseudonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto.
But Sirer’s proposal has nothing to do with the possible reappearance of Bitcoin’s creator.
Instead, he raised concerns that quantum computing could threaten the security of these coins, which still use an older cryptographic standard.
Hello world
Sirer’s idea comes shortly after Google unveiled its new quantum computing chip dubbed “Willow.”
According to the tech giant, Willow can perform a standard benchmark computation in under five minutes “that would take one of today’s fastest supercomputers 10 septillion (that is, 1025) years.”
And while Willow can’t yet break Bitcoin’s encryption, it marks a key step toward practical quantum computing.
Sirer claims that quantum computing “will make it easier to perform certain operations, like factoring numbers, while others, such as inverting one-way hash functions, remain just as difficult.” However, there are still too many ifs and buts.
Moral case
The thing is, Bitcoin’s security is still solid against these advances because it relies on hashing algorithms and elliptic curve cryptography. But that can’t be said about Satoshi-era coins.
That’s where Sirer points out the most important exception: early Bitcoin coins, including those likely mined by Nakamoto, used the Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) format.
Unlike newer formats, P2PK exposes the public key, giving quantum attackers more to work with.
The Avalanche CEO says these coins “provide the ‘mother of all cryptography bounties,'” emphasizing the risk posed by this older format if quantum computers become more capable.
Sirer argues that the Bitcoin community should consider “freezing” coins stored in P2PK addresses or setting a “sunset date” for their usability.
Such a move, he suggested, would protect Bitcoin’s overall integrity from a future where quantum computers might crack P2PK cryptography.
The proposal, however, has drawn both support and criticism. Advocates see it as a proactive step to mitigate risks posed by emerging technology.
Critics, however, view it as an attack on the principles of decentralization and ownership that underpin Bitcoin.
What’s the matter with P2PK
Most modern Bitcoin wallets use Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash — also known as P2PKH — or SegWit formats, which only reveal a hashed version of the public key.
The additional security layer ensures that even if a quantum computer exists, it would have to first invert the hash to extract useful information — an extremely tough nut to crack.
In contrast, P2PK addresses store the public key in plaintext, giving potential attackers a direct starting point for quantum attacks using algorithms like Shor’s, which can, in theory, break elliptic curve cryptography with enough computational power.
Ben Sigman, a Bitcoin entrepreneur, explained in an X post that despite the recent quantum developments, computers like Willow are still far from capable of launching such attacks.
“Cracking Bitcoin’s ECDSA 256 encryption would require over 1,000,000 qubits,” Sigman wrote, adding further that Willow’s 105 qubits “aren’t even close.”
Critics push back on freezing proposal
An X user under the alias “maeda_aaron” argued that freezing Satoshi’s coins “could flush out Satoshi from silence,” adding that such a move is “more detrimental to crypto than someone possibly being able to get access.”
Others have raised doubts about how to identify and freeze these coins without causing more controversy.
“How to clearly define “Satoshi’s coin”? that’s the big issue,” asked user under alias “r8raq,” highlighting that “a sunset date and freeze all coins at P2PK utxos is just alike another “birthright citizen cancelling”, it’ll be a tremoudes controvosial issue!”
Others worry about the precedent this could set for future changes. Bitcoin’s “killer feature” is that it can’t be easily changed, and messing with its rules might turn off users who like that it resists censorship and interference.
While the risks posed by quantum computing are speculative for now, Sirer and others believe the crypto community must prepare for consequences.
“Realistic attacks on cryptocurrencies are still a long way off,” Sirer wrote. “For now, let’s all watch how quantum computers develop over the next few decades.”
#quantumcomputers #quantumAI #quantumchip #Avalanche #CryptoNews