Bitcoin and quantum computing • Hacker News Board

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#131

Post by latchkey » Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 5:57 PM UTC

ciupicri wrote: post #119

glerk wrote: post #20

One thing that is not addressed: say this quantum attack happens tomorrow and everyone agrees it was an attack, what would prevent the community (miners, node operators, and users) to hard fork the chain at a snapshot before the attack, patch the protocol, and call that Bitcoin? There would be loss of value of course, but it is not unrecoverable. It’s worth remembering that Ethereum forked for much less (not even a b…

In my humble opinion (because I'm not a "crypto investor"), Ethereum lost all credibility with that fork. You can't trust a system/currency that changes the rules like that.

I believe actions speak louder than words. Their continued execution, including successfully switching engines mid-flight (The Merge), has earned them a bit of reprieve in your view.

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#132

Post by spopejoy » Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 6:44 PM UTC

xoa wrote: post #10

> Q: Stealing is illegal, so why would anyone use a CRQC to steal Bitcoin? I've had this thought for awhile actually: how would reproducing some random number be legally "stealing" under any legal system in the world? Putting aside that cryptocurrencies have always been about "code decides" etc, that they're outside of the legal system entirely, but I'm struggling to see where there's any actual property interest her…

> how would reproducing some random number be legally "stealing" under any legal system in the world?

The usual way, via the criminal code. My old business treasury was scammed into transferring funds on-chain to an impersonator. We were able to recover losses through an insurance claim which required us to report the theft to the police.

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#133

Post by QuantumNomad_ » Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 7:08 PM UTC

xoa wrote: post #129

QuantumNomad_ wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uh, in the United States? I don’t live in the US, and am not a citizen of the US. > You may wish to review your understanding and confidence in your understanding of tax law. The tax laws in my country are different from the ones in yours. I know the tax laws of my country well enough.

> I don’t live in the US, and am not a citizen of the US. Well good then, I guess you don't have to worry about any of this so long as no American ever gets a quantum computer! Not like any research on it happens here or anything so you shouldn't need to be concerned.

The US happily arrests and charges people for cryptocurrency theft too.

> An unsealed indictment on Thursday identified Malone Lam, 20, a citizen of Singapore who lives in Miami and Los Angeles, and Jeandiel Serrano, 21, of Los Angeles, showing both had been arrested Wednesday night and charged with conspiring to steal and launder the cryptocurrency. They were set to appear in separate federal courts in California and Florida on Thursday, according to the Justice Department.

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2024/09/19/police-arrests-...

Link from 2024

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#134

Post by wmf » Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 8:13 PM UTC

hananova wrote: post #112

tshaddox wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be surprised if the U.S. legal system requires itself to list every possible mechanism by which someone might steal money.

Bitcoins aren't money.

They're property which is also illegal to steal.

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#135

Post by greyface- » Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 9:13 PM UTC

hananova wrote: post #112

tshaddox wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be surprised if the U.S. legal system requires itself to list every possible mechanism by which someone might steal money.

Bitcoins aren't money.

18 U.S.C. § 2311 defines "money" in the context of stolen property as:

> the legal tender of the United States or of any foreign country, or any counterfeit thereof

Bitcoin has, at times, met this standard by being the legal tender of a foreign country.

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#136

Post by ciupicri » Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 11:25 PM UTC

latchkey wrote: post #131

ciupicri wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my humble opinion (because I'm not a "crypto investor"), Ethereum lost all credibility with that fork. You can't trust a system/currency that changes the rules like that.

I believe actions speak louder than words. Their continued execution, including successfully switching engines mid-flight (The Merge), has earned them a bit of reprieve in your view.

Speaking of actions and words, what good is a contract if it can't be enforced? So I find hard to trust Ethereum.

All that new stuff could change the point of view if it were some ordinary software, but since we're talking about a currency, trust is very hard to regain. How can someone be sure that they won't change their mind again?

I haven't followed the evolution of Dogecoin, but even that sounds more reliable and at least it doesn't pretend to be taken seriously.

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#137

Post by latchkey » Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 11:32 PM UTC

ciupicri wrote: post #136

latchkey wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe actions speak louder than words. Their continued execution, including successfully switching engines mid-flight (The Merge), has earned them a bit of reprieve in your view.

Speaking of actions and words, what good is a contract if it can't be enforced? So I find hard to trust Ethereum. All that new stuff could change the point of view if it were some ordinary software, but since we're talking about a currency, trust is very hard to regain. How can someone be sure that they won't change their mind again? I haven't followed the evolution of Dogecoin, but even that sounds more reliable and…

[dead]

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#138

Post by tshaddox » Thu, Apr 09, 2026, 2:29 AM UTC

hananova wrote: post #112

tshaddox wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be surprised if the U.S. legal system requires itself to list every possible mechanism by which someone might steal money.

Bitcoins aren't money.

Good luck convincing the government that you aren’t guilty of money laundering because you used bitcoins.

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#139

Post by burnerRhodov2 » Thu, Apr 09, 2026, 12:00 PM UTC

mono442 wrote: post #114

burnerRhodov2 wrote: post #81

This is one of the most lazy writings i've ever heard... CRQC is not non-zero across all timeslines, it is inevitable. With the inevitability, the satoshi wallets can never be secured.

tbh I've heard the same about the nuclear fusion for many years now

We created fusion in 1952.

Re: Bitcoin and quantum computing

#140

Post by superpositions » Thu, Apr 09, 2026, 2:17 PM UTC

Retr0id wrote: post #66

hgujral wrote: post #65

The world digital economy is worth more than 20T and we're concerned about an asset <2T!? If quantum breaks the highest form of encryption we have today, we have bigger problems at hand.

Quantum computing does not break all cryptography.

I think a lot of the confusion in these threads comes from treating quantum risk as a single binary event.

A centralized system can often rotate credentials, patch infra, and recover operationally. A decentralized system with exposed legacy keys and social coordination constraints is a very different problem.