Quantum FUD worries me because three of Bitcoin's most influential devs seem to reject the urgency:
- Luke Dashjr: 'BIP 360 doesn't quantum proof Bitcoin. Quantum isn't a real threat. Bitcoin has much bigger problems.'
- Peter Todd: 'Cryptography relevant quantum computers do not exist. The demos running toy problems do not count.'
- Adam Back: 'Probably not for 20-40 years, if then.'
Google’s new 2029 deadline for post quantum migration is just three years away.
Bitcoin does have a proposal: BIP 360.
It reduces public key exposure but existing coins stay vulnerable until users manually migrate.
Satoshi won't do that.
On the other side, Ethereum Foundation taking the risk seriously and $ETH is outperforming BTC on the quantum timeline changes.
So can Bitcoin Core devs show they are taking the issue seriously? Or is it easier to sell BTC (or rotate to ETH) first and then ask questions?
Ethereum is taking quantum risk seriously.
EF formed a dedicated post quantum security team in Jan 2026 with $2M in research prizes.
Justin Drake said EF management officially declared PQ security a 'top strategic priority.'
They launched pq[.]ethereum[.]org with full specs and timelines.
Huge contrast here.
x.com/drakefjustin/status/2014...…
THIS
McKenna
@Crypto_McKenna
If Bitcoin can make it past the quantum threat it will become the store of value of the 21st century.
If Bitcoin Core fails to mobilize then it will lose it's store of value status.
Lots of risk on the table.
thisisserious
From Twitter
Disclaimer: The content above is only the author's opinion which does not represent any position of Followin, and is not intended as, and shall not be understood or construed as, investment advice from Followin.
Like
Add to Favorites
Comments
Share
Relevant content
