Eh, if quantum computers steal all my bitcoins from me it’s also going to steal my bank accounts and everything digital tied to me. It will destroy the entire digital economy. I think the BTC might be the least of my worries at that point. I’d be more worried about my rifle and ammo stockpile.
That's correct, gold, platinum and silver didn't help the people who went to the gas chambers. Survivors had to wait over a decade to cash in their gold for a decent price after WWII.
Yes, I was a bit off topic by referring to market timing in another crisis situation. PM price volatility happens when people are looking for a safe haven as their currency is being debased.
came in the comments to say this. i'm glad someone beat me to it. if cryptography collapses... bitcoin is really going to be the last thing to care about *or* steal.
Yeah exactly. If all the bitcoins get stolen it means the nuclear weapon launch codes are also at risk and literally everything digital. There is no scenario where QCs devastate bitcoin and nothing else. If bitcoin goes it will be the end of the digital world as we know it:
But hey guys, why are you only picturing a scenario where QC’s create hyper advanced decryption technology the likes of which the world has never seen. If that’s true won’t QCs also create hyper advanced encryption technology the likes of which the world has never seen also? Why is everyone assuming that if you have 2 QCs competing against each other, one doing encryption and the other decryption, the decryption one will win 100% of the time? How is that a given?
Great Read! I must say I have to agree, and I own 10+ BTC. My favorite part of your article is when you put a spot light on the Achilles heel of BTC. The same thing that built the faith in BTC is the same thing that will destroy it. It’s Unchangeable. This really alters my outlook on a lot of things.
Quantum computing won’t affect banking because banking can pivot. Fiat can pivot. BTC can’t pivot. Sure it works now. But it literally cannot work at some point in the future , we don’t know when. But we know that for sure.
The inherent cryptographic vulnerabilities of the blockchain system were clearly outlined, even if explained in very simple terms. This seems to be an issue of reading comprehension on your end.
100%. People are idiots. It’s cricking code with data stored in a database. The telecoms can intercept and corporations holding the data in the database can alter the data any time and any way they see fit. The ignorance is mind numbing. It’s like buying and owning gold, keeping it in your house, and giving some unknown entity the keys to your house while you’re somewhere else.
You’re comparing apples to oranges. Banking systems are flexible… they can evolve, adapt, and patch vulnerabilities.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, is designed to be immutable by default. It’s both its strength and its limitation, and, in this particular case, it’s what makes Bitcoin ideal for doom.
Just as a side note, we’ll soon start seeing changes. If I had to guess, the first visible shifts will likely appear in web security protocols, especially in areas like HTML and encryption layers.
I agree it’s generally immutable. But it has changed and been updated multiple times throughout its history. While it will be hard to get everyone on board with 1 solution, everyone knows eventually an update to the protocol is needed. It’s hard but not impossible.
If I had to compare the odds qualitatively... say, between your house burning down in California (about 1 in 5 over five years) and winning the Powerball (1 in 300 million). I'd say it's dramatically closer to winning the Powerball.
Considering the network has been updated via fork 5-7 times, why not win the powerball again? I think it’s silly to think that millions up people are just going to sit around and let quantum take their money. People will be proactive. Solutions are already being built now. The network will adapt. Everyone knows this is a threat and the network knows it will have to update eventually. Besides, we are 10 to 20 years away from this being an issue anyway.
I respect your opinion and do think it will be a rough patch with a lot of arguments. But people aren’t just going to let their money be stolen, they’ll swap over to the new fork.
Zero. That’s the number of Bitcoin hard forks that aren’t fundamentally flawed... or outright scams. Take Bitcoin Cash, probably the most famous example. Its core function wasn’t innovation or decentralization, but duplicating the original Bitcoin ledger to enrich early insiders. It simply mirrored the allocation of the forkers, handing them massive bags of cash. (Google “hashrate hopping” if you want to see how deep the game went)
But even setting that aside... let’s pretend the fork was clean, fair, and technically sound.
Where’s the adoption?
Bitcoin’s value comes from its immutability and community consensus. The moment you open the door to forking as a means of governance, it becomes a slippery slope.
If you’ve forked once, why not fork again? Why not change the consensus rules entirely? Switch to Proof of Stake? Proof of History? Proof of Popularity? It'll be more... efficient
“they can…” But will they? As you point out, BTC also could adapt to the quantum threat. So the question is will banks adapt in time, will BTC adapt in time.
Where are the smartest most innovative and most altruistic people to be found? In banking or in BTC?
The issue will be resolved not according to the laws of physics but according to the human frailties and strengths of those involved.
But if security can be breached that quickly, how can banks/ Financials stop it? Or any thing that processes payments? This sounds like passwords, even 2FA, will be moot.
This is all well and good, but it is far more likely that crypto will be destroyed by governments and/or insiders long before quantum computing tilts the balance.
No, it always comes down to the ability to protect those assets. In the quantum scenario, you’re planning on having enough guns and/or laws (and the ability to have them enforced) when quantum chaos is unleashed? Good luck…
How much energy do you think would be required to power the quantum hack? If that feat is physically or economically possible, you’d ultimately realize that the endeavor would be a total loss because the act would inherently destroy the value of the target through loss of trust.
That's a good question and interesting idea. I'll need some latitude to articulate a counter argument (please indulge me). Let's assume the computational capability is still, say, 10 years out, and the power requirement is significant but doable. Also, over that time, BTC and other blockchain assets become imbedded in the global currency system/plumbing, both as store of value, collateral, and transaction/settlement rails (we're already seeing this happening with institutional investment, digital asset treasury companies, decentralized trading/hypothecation/collateralization, etc.)
If you grant these assumptions and that a quantum hack of BTC would be a binary 'destruction of value' event as faith in its immutability is invalidated, it would likely trigger a systemic counterparty default, meaning you would be out your hack-investment and wouldn't realize your payoff as your borrower(s) go belly up.
Perhaps if the size of the short (cumulative, not just yours) were relatively small (and well-placed), maybe counterparty default could be avoided but that would also significantly reduce the payout relative to the hack investment.
In summary, great question. As you can see from my rambling response, I can't respond with any confidence other than a gut feeling that a future BTC hack would so fundamentally alter the world financial system that it would break it.
Also for context, I don't believe that a fiat world reserve currency will exist for much longer. See USD, $37T outstanding debt, and 5+% fiscal deficits projected ad infinitum as exhibits A-C. Whatever comes next will have to be reconstituted in hard money assets, and I'd guess that BTC or some other digital asset will be a prominent part of a basket of such assets.
regarding the theoretical discussion of how quickly will quantum computing will break SHA - i think everyone is just throwing numbers.
i think it is enough for someone to break it once - to erode the trust, so you don't really need the scale of bringing the entire system down, which might be an easier thing. i think we can trust human nature to find a way to break something if there's profit in it :)
regarding the context comment: I tend to agree.
i think 37T is overlooking the 100T off-balance-sheet liabilities the US has.
It also ignores a few T from China and EU.
a global reset is not something that is out of realm of possibilities IMO.
after global reset - i don't see people trusting anything intangible for a few decades. they'd want gold, land, ships or sheep. eventually, they'll forget that they lost everything and trust some tool from a mathematician noone ever met - but it will take awhile.
Thanks for the dialogue man. A couple short responses:
If the scale of effort to break BTC cryptography wasn’t of an existentially binary scale it would have already happened.
Your reference to the $100T of off balance sheet liabilities proves my point that the leverage on our fiat financial system has reached farcical levels. I think the analog will be replaced by the digital soon.
Lastly, BTC is functionally equivalent to gold in this scenario. We are so far removed from a physical subsistence environment that without electricity you couldn’t trade in gold anyhow. If you had all the gold, there’d be no one around producing what you needed at any price. Your wealth would be non fungible except at subsistence levels. The cost to store/keep/protect it would outstrip its utility.
If that’s the future you are planning for, join me in my whiskey and bullets project! 🤣
That’s a pretty reckless way to look at life. Not every bet is worth making, even when it’s in your wheelhouse. Just look at the stats on pro poker players: the best ones fold most of the time. TBH investing is the same. It’s about saying no to almost everything. Like poker, the real skill is in waiting patiently for the perfect pitch.
I like the idea, but I have to make one point, the format you are using seems to be heavily influenced by cgpt, personally I hate it, I find bullet point only usable for a CV, not an essay or an article.
At least come up with a new argument. This is such tired nonsense.
2018 was the last time I heard a counter argument that was even interesting. Ever since then it’s poor fags like you regurgitating talk points that can be deconstructed in minutes
Bold view! Not sure I fully agree. Bitcoin is polarizing—exactly why I profiled Lyn Alden’s contrasting stance in my July 6 piece. Worth examining both camps before forming conclusions. Here’s a counterpoint:
Eh, if quantum computers steal all my bitcoins from me it’s also going to steal my bank accounts and everything digital tied to me. It will destroy the entire digital economy. I think the BTC might be the least of my worries at that point. I’d be more worried about my rifle and ammo stockpile.
Quantum computing ain’t stealing held physical gold, platinum, and silver 😂
You'll have to time selling those well. As in 1920s Germany they were worth a lot one day and many times less the next day.
That's correct, gold, platinum and silver didn't help the people who went to the gas chambers. Survivors had to wait over a decade to cash in their gold for a decent price after WWII.
I was more referring to the change of currency that happened in the 1920s.
Yes, I was a bit off topic by referring to market timing in another crisis situation. PM price volatility happens when people are looking for a safe haven as their currency is being debased.
came in the comments to say this. i'm glad someone beat me to it. if cryptography collapses... bitcoin is really going to be the last thing to care about *or* steal.
No, the entire economy us regulated. Your religion has no regulator and thus, no protection. Good luck!
What?
Get some education before you die.
What is your native language?
What is your race?
Which ever one you hate most
Ammo and access to clean water....
Lmao yes 1000% this is exactly what I was logging on to say. We have so many more worse problems once QC hits than Bitcoin.
Same with your fear spread of Fiat. Get some economical education.
Yeah exactly. If all the bitcoins get stolen it means the nuclear weapon launch codes are also at risk and literally everything digital. There is no scenario where QCs devastate bitcoin and nothing else. If bitcoin goes it will be the end of the digital world as we know it:
But hey guys, why are you only picturing a scenario where QC’s create hyper advanced decryption technology the likes of which the world has never seen. If that’s true won’t QCs also create hyper advanced encryption technology the likes of which the world has never seen also? Why is everyone assuming that if you have 2 QCs competing against each other, one doing encryption and the other decryption, the decryption one will win 100% of the time? How is that a given?
Great Read! I must say I have to agree, and I own 10+ BTC. My favorite part of your article is when you put a spot light on the Achilles heel of BTC. The same thing that built the faith in BTC is the same thing that will destroy it. It’s Unchangeable. This really alters my outlook on a lot of things.
Quantum computing won’t affect banking because banking can pivot. Fiat can pivot. BTC can’t pivot. Sure it works now. But it literally cannot work at some point in the future , we don’t know when. But we know that for sure.
Exactly David!
doxes his (claimed) stash
Says bitcoinS
Has highschool level understanding of quantum computing
Nigga quit larping
The inherent cryptographic vulnerabilities of the blockchain system were clearly outlined, even if explained in very simple terms. This seems to be an issue of reading comprehension on your end.
It's not unchangeable. That's a myth.
100%. People are idiots. It’s cricking code with data stored in a database. The telecoms can intercept and corporations holding the data in the database can alter the data any time and any way they see fit. The ignorance is mind numbing. It’s like buying and owning gold, keeping it in your house, and giving some unknown entity the keys to your house while you’re somewhere else.
you don't understand bitcoin if you think that
If 51% agree to change SHA 256……….
Interesting thoughts. Now apply them to banking, credit cards, website passwords, email etc. this is more than just a bitcoin only problem.
Thanks for the comment!
You’re comparing apples to oranges. Banking systems are flexible… they can evolve, adapt, and patch vulnerabilities.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, is designed to be immutable by default. It’s both its strength and its limitation, and, in this particular case, it’s what makes Bitcoin ideal for doom.
Just as a side note, we’ll soon start seeing changes. If I had to guess, the first visible shifts will likely appear in web security protocols, especially in areas like HTML and encryption layers.
I agree it’s generally immutable. But it has changed and been updated multiple times throughout its history. While it will be hard to get everyone on board with 1 solution, everyone knows eventually an update to the protocol is needed. It’s hard but not impossible.
If I had to compare the odds qualitatively... say, between your house burning down in California (about 1 in 5 over five years) and winning the Powerball (1 in 300 million). I'd say it's dramatically closer to winning the Powerball.
Considering the network has been updated via fork 5-7 times, why not win the powerball again? I think it’s silly to think that millions up people are just going to sit around and let quantum take their money. People will be proactive. Solutions are already being built now. The network will adapt. Everyone knows this is a threat and the network knows it will have to update eventually. Besides, we are 10 to 20 years away from this being an issue anyway.
I respect your opinion and do think it will be a rough patch with a lot of arguments. But people aren’t just going to let their money be stolen, they’ll swap over to the new fork.
Zero. That’s the number of Bitcoin hard forks that aren’t fundamentally flawed... or outright scams. Take Bitcoin Cash, probably the most famous example. Its core function wasn’t innovation or decentralization, but duplicating the original Bitcoin ledger to enrich early insiders. It simply mirrored the allocation of the forkers, handing them massive bags of cash. (Google “hashrate hopping” if you want to see how deep the game went)
But even setting that aside... let’s pretend the fork was clean, fair, and technically sound.
Where’s the adoption?
Bitcoin’s value comes from its immutability and community consensus. The moment you open the door to forking as a means of governance, it becomes a slippery slope.
If you’ve forked once, why not fork again? Why not change the consensus rules entirely? Switch to Proof of Stake? Proof of History? Proof of Popularity? It'll be more... efficient
Quantum does not have to be a hard fork…
"Take for example Bitcoin Cash (that nobody cares or uses anymore)"
“they can…” But will they? As you point out, BTC also could adapt to the quantum threat. So the question is will banks adapt in time, will BTC adapt in time.
Where are the smartest most innovative and most altruistic people to be found? In banking or in BTC?
The issue will be resolved not according to the laws of physics but according to the human frailties and strengths of those involved.
But if security can be breached that quickly, how can banks/ Financials stop it? Or any thing that processes payments? This sounds like passwords, even 2FA, will be moot.
This is all well and good, but it is far more likely that crypto will be destroyed by governments and/or insiders long before quantum computing tilts the balance.
Fascinating article, Alejandro!
At the end of the day, reserves still come down to gold, property, and physical assets. Everything else remains vulnerable to this kind of fragility.
No, it always comes down to the ability to protect those assets. In the quantum scenario, you’re planning on having enough guns and/or laws (and the ability to have them enforced) when quantum chaos is unleashed? Good luck…
How much energy do you think would be required to power the quantum hack? If that feat is physically or economically possible, you’d ultimately realize that the endeavor would be a total loss because the act would inherently destroy the value of the target through loss of trust.
but that's the point, no?
An Actor can short BTC, then do something small and stupid just to prove his point, and make is known.
in the words of Hans Gruber: "and by the time they work out what went wrong, we’ll be sitting on a beach, earning twenty percent."
That's a good question and interesting idea. I'll need some latitude to articulate a counter argument (please indulge me). Let's assume the computational capability is still, say, 10 years out, and the power requirement is significant but doable. Also, over that time, BTC and other blockchain assets become imbedded in the global currency system/plumbing, both as store of value, collateral, and transaction/settlement rails (we're already seeing this happening with institutional investment, digital asset treasury companies, decentralized trading/hypothecation/collateralization, etc.)
If you grant these assumptions and that a quantum hack of BTC would be a binary 'destruction of value' event as faith in its immutability is invalidated, it would likely trigger a systemic counterparty default, meaning you would be out your hack-investment and wouldn't realize your payoff as your borrower(s) go belly up.
Perhaps if the size of the short (cumulative, not just yours) were relatively small (and well-placed), maybe counterparty default could be avoided but that would also significantly reduce the payout relative to the hack investment.
In summary, great question. As you can see from my rambling response, I can't respond with any confidence other than a gut feeling that a future BTC hack would so fundamentally alter the world financial system that it would break it.
Also for context, I don't believe that a fiat world reserve currency will exist for much longer. See USD, $37T outstanding debt, and 5+% fiscal deficits projected ad infinitum as exhibits A-C. Whatever comes next will have to be reconstituted in hard money assets, and I'd guess that BTC or some other digital asset will be a prominent part of a basket of such assets.
regarding the theoretical discussion of how quickly will quantum computing will break SHA - i think everyone is just throwing numbers.
i think it is enough for someone to break it once - to erode the trust, so you don't really need the scale of bringing the entire system down, which might be an easier thing. i think we can trust human nature to find a way to break something if there's profit in it :)
regarding the context comment: I tend to agree.
i think 37T is overlooking the 100T off-balance-sheet liabilities the US has.
It also ignores a few T from China and EU.
a global reset is not something that is out of realm of possibilities IMO.
after global reset - i don't see people trusting anything intangible for a few decades. they'd want gold, land, ships or sheep. eventually, they'll forget that they lost everything and trust some tool from a mathematician noone ever met - but it will take awhile.
Thanks for the dialogue man. A couple short responses:
If the scale of effort to break BTC cryptography wasn’t of an existentially binary scale it would have already happened.
Your reference to the $100T of off balance sheet liabilities proves my point that the leverage on our fiat financial system has reached farcical levels. I think the analog will be replaced by the digital soon.
Lastly, BTC is functionally equivalent to gold in this scenario. We are so far removed from a physical subsistence environment that without electricity you couldn’t trade in gold anyhow. If you had all the gold, there’d be no one around producing what you needed at any price. Your wealth would be non fungible except at subsistence levels. The cost to store/keep/protect it would outstrip its utility.
If that’s the future you are planning for, join me in my whiskey and bullets project! 🤣
Clickbait
Can you post us verifiable details of your short position
I do not have any crypto positions (neither long nor short)
So you have no conviction in your thesis.
Having a strong opinion and making a bet are two different things.
On principle I don’t short anything because my personality and shorting don’t match. It introduces an element of timing that I'm awful at.
Additionally I focus on where I think I’m the best, and that is definitely not crypto.
Both of these points are, again, unrelated to having a strong formed opinion on a subject that I’ve covered for almost a decade now… cybersecurity
It essentially comes down to credibility. If you are not prepared to back your view is your view worth anything?
Read back
Why would you ask such a question? What if his position/s expired today?
If you’re not prepared to back your opinion then your opinion is not worth much.
That’s a pretty reckless way to look at life. Not every bet is worth making, even when it’s in your wheelhouse. Just look at the stats on pro poker players: the best ones fold most of the time. TBH investing is the same. It’s about saying no to almost everything. Like poker, the real skill is in waiting patiently for the perfect pitch.
Great report. Worth a read
Read Hijacking Bitcoin. It’s going to 0, but not because quantum computers
Thanks for the comment, Ignacio! Curious... what stood out to you the most, and what felt least convincing or compelling in the piece?
The book doesn't argue that
Wow someone woke up and chose violence 🤣
Correction… I ALWAYS choose violence 🤣🤣🤣
Bitcoin maxis are guarding a chapel whose doors are already standing ajar.
En garde!
2^128 isn't half of 2^256...
Missed that.
I like the idea, but I have to make one point, the format you are using seems to be heavily influenced by cgpt, personally I hate it, I find bullet point only usable for a CV, not an essay or an article.
Very obvious once you point it out.
At least come up with a new argument. This is such tired nonsense.
2018 was the last time I heard a counter argument that was even interesting. Ever since then it’s poor fags like you regurgitating talk points that can be deconstructed in minutes
Bold view! Not sure I fully agree. Bitcoin is polarizing—exactly why I profiled Lyn Alden’s contrasting stance in my July 6 piece. Worth examining both camps before forming conclusions. Here’s a counterpoint:
https://divistockchronicles.substack.com/p/lyn-alden-a-bitcoin-enthusiast