Google cut quantum computing errors by 40x—but only 8 out of every 100 attempts succeed. And for those old bitcoins mined by Satoshi, the keys to move them may already be lost 🦖
📊 进群看每日策略
In an experiment published in Science this week, Google’s Willow quantum chip reduced the error rate for preparing magic states by about 40x. The states that passed verification had a fidelity of 99.99%, but only about 8 out of every 100 preparations made the grade. It’s an impressive engineering milestone—but the work is far from finished.
Many people are treating this news as another “quantum computers are coming for Bitcoin” false alarm. What really matters isn’t the 40x figure, but which part of the problem it solves.
The most expensive part of a quantum attack has never been the computation—it’s the preparation. Before a machine can crack a wallet, it has to continuously produce a resource called magic states. Each one is used once and then discarded. In a paper published in March, Google estimated that a simulated attack on a public key would take about 9 minutes. During those 9 minutes, the machine would need to consume around 500,000 sufficiently reliable magic states every second.
The significance of this experiment is that it shows these resources can be produced using less hardware—not that the cost of cracking Bitcoin has suddenly been divided by 40. The March estimate already assumed that magic states could be produced efficiently, so the two figures can’t be multiplied together. This is engineering progress, not a countdown.
But engineering progress adds up. In March, Google put the threshold at fewer than 500,000 physical qubits. In September, researchers cut the workload for one key computational step in half. Step by step, that number is getting smaller.
The bigger problem is the old coins.
According to a warning cited by CoinDesk, the public keys for about 6.4 million bitcoins have already been exposed on-chain. The coins mined by Satoshi in Bitcoin’s early days used P2PK outputs, which means their public keys have been on the ledger since day one. There’s no need to wait for the owner to make a transaction. And upgrading to a quantum-resistant signature scheme requires the private-key holder to sign the migration themselves. If the private key is lost, the coins are stuck forever—and remain exposed forever.
There’s already been some movement on-chain. On October 7, an address that hadn’t moved since July 2010 transferred 100.02 bitcoins. It had been dormant for more than 16 years; the coins were worth about $8.5 million. In August, six wallets from 2011 to 2014 also moved a combined 553.59 bitcoins, worth about $40 million at the time. This doesn’t necessarily mean anyone is preparing for quantum computers, but it does show that some old coins are waking up.
My view is simple: quantum computers aren’t coming in the short term, but this is the kind of risk you can lose to by doing nothing. If the price falls, you can wait. If the signature scheme becomes obsolete, waiting won’t bring your coins back. ⚠️
Let’s talk in the comments: Do you have any holdings in your wallet that haven’t moved in more than five years? If you had to migrate to a new signature scheme today, would you know what to do first? 🔐
Every day, I bring you the latest crypto market trends—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines 👀🚀
📊 进群看每日策略
In an experiment published in Science this week, Google’s Willow quantum chip reduced the error rate for preparing magic states by about 40x. The states that passed verification had a fidelity of 99.99%, but only about 8 out of every 100 preparations made the grade. It’s an impressive engineering milestone—but the work is far from finished.
Many people are treating this news as another “quantum computers are coming for Bitcoin” false alarm. What really matters isn’t the 40x figure, but which part of the problem it solves.
The most expensive part of a quantum attack has never been the computation—it’s the preparation. Before a machine can crack a wallet, it has to continuously produce a resource called magic states. Each one is used once and then discarded. In a paper published in March, Google estimated that a simulated attack on a public key would take about 9 minutes. During those 9 minutes, the machine would need to consume around 500,000 sufficiently reliable magic states every second.
The significance of this experiment is that it shows these resources can be produced using less hardware—not that the cost of cracking Bitcoin has suddenly been divided by 40. The March estimate already assumed that magic states could be produced efficiently, so the two figures can’t be multiplied together. This is engineering progress, not a countdown.
But engineering progress adds up. In March, Google put the threshold at fewer than 500,000 physical qubits. In September, researchers cut the workload for one key computational step in half. Step by step, that number is getting smaller.
The bigger problem is the old coins.
According to a warning cited by CoinDesk, the public keys for about 6.4 million bitcoins have already been exposed on-chain. The coins mined by Satoshi in Bitcoin’s early days used P2PK outputs, which means their public keys have been on the ledger since day one. There’s no need to wait for the owner to make a transaction. And upgrading to a quantum-resistant signature scheme requires the private-key holder to sign the migration themselves. If the private key is lost, the coins are stuck forever—and remain exposed forever.
There’s already been some movement on-chain. On October 7, an address that hadn’t moved since July 2010 transferred 100.02 bitcoins. It had been dormant for more than 16 years; the coins were worth about $8.5 million. In August, six wallets from 2011 to 2014 also moved a combined 553.59 bitcoins, worth about $40 million at the time. This doesn’t necessarily mean anyone is preparing for quantum computers, but it does show that some old coins are waking up.
My view is simple: quantum computers aren’t coming in the short term, but this is the kind of risk you can lose to by doing nothing. If the price falls, you can wait. If the signature scheme becomes obsolete, waiting won’t bring your coins back. ⚠️
Let’s talk in the comments: Do you have any holdings in your wallet that haven’t moved in more than five years? If you had to migrate to a new signature scheme today, would you know what to do first? 🔐
Every day, I bring you the latest crypto market trends—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines 👀🚀