Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Quantum computing has often been described as a future threat to Bitcoin cryptography. However, the real question is not whether quantum machines could eventually break down. The question is whether the Bitcoin network can reach a consensus on what to do if that time approaches.
A sufficiently powerful quantum computer doesn’t just prove Bitcoin encryption. Test the will of society to change the basic assumptions about immutability, property and neutrality.
Sponsored
Sponsored
CryptoQuant CEO Relives Bitcoin Satoshi Freeze Debate
At the heart of the debate lies an obvious question: whether weak currencies, including those valued by Satoshi, should be frozen. In a million bitcoins In a million bitcoins, Or should Bitcoin just stay based on the rules? CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju raised this debate in a recent post.
“The hardest fact about the Bitcoin quantum upgrade: you will probably need to freeze ~1 million Bitcoin satoshis, and millions more in legacy addresses,” he wrote.
Joe mentioned the amount of dormant Bitcoin as part of the concern. About 3.4 million bitcoins have not moved in more than a decade, including about 1 million bitcoins It is widely attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto.
At current market prices, that inventory represents hundreds of billions of dollars. Joe stated that Bitcoin’s security model assumes that attacks are not economically feasible.
However, if quantum computing makes key extraction cheap and practical, this assumption will no longer be true. This, in turn, will create a strong financial incentive for attackers to target exposed addresses.
However, Joe emphasized that the main obstacle may not be technical but social. The CEO added that reaching agreement within the Bitcoin community is historically difficult, especially when proposals seem to conflict with the basic principles of the network.
Sponsored
Sponsored
“The block size debate lasted 3+ years and caused a hard fork. SegWit2x failed to gain enough support from the community. Frozen sleeper coins will face similar resistance,” he said.
Joe warned that complete agreement on how to deal with a quantum threat may never be achieved, raising the possibility of a Bitcoin-matching fork as the technology advances. While cryptographic updates can be rolled out relatively quickly, gaining general community consensus is a slower and more ambiguous process.
In his view, the central problem is not whether the so-called “Question Day” comes in five or ten years, but rather whether Bitcoin can conform socially before the technological change forces it. He argued that developers are not the bottleneck. The consensus is correct.
“Do you support the freezing of dormant coins, including Satoshi coins, to save Bitcoin from quantum attacks? Or does it go against the fundamental principles of Bitcoin? If this alone is what really divides us, the quantum debate must begin now,” concluded the executive.
The reaction in the community was swift. Andrei Dragosh, head of European research at Bitwise, opposes the idea of ​​implementing intervention at the protocol level, while some have supported it. Freeze Currencies.
Sponsored
Sponsored
“I say don’t get rid of it – don’t force promotions on anybody,” He said.
At first, Analyst Willie Wu suggested that Bitcoin is likely to adopt quantum resistant signatures. However, he argued that such a correction did not address the issue of whether the lost coins could return to circulation.
Wu estimated there was a 75% chance. Lost currencies are not frozen Through a hard fork at the protocol level. If quantum hackers make these wallets available, the redeemed Bitcoin can return to the market, expanding the active supply and affecting the valuation dynamics.
He added that the market has already started to… Pricing the possibility of returning lost coins Before the trade.
Sponsored
Sponsored
Is Bitcoin’s Quantum Threat Overrated? Analysts say the real risks are still decades away
At the same time, Some analysts believe that quantum risks Far away. Bitcoin entrepreneur Ben Sigman argued that “the real threat is not a quantum computer” but rather “the fear of it”. He added that the real quantum risks may be 30-50 years away.
“Here are the current calculations for the Bitcoin ECDSA crack: • ~2,100 logical qubits • Up to 10,000 physical qubits per logical qubit • This means potentially 21 million physical qubits • Up to 40 megawatts of power – for a single attack. The best hardware today: ~6,000 qubits is not even noise proof. to publish
Others see Bitcoin’s vulnerability as part of a broader digital security problem.
This dichotomy stands out The challenge for Bitcoin stakeholders. At the same time, it seems that the market takes into account Supply risk associated with quantity.
As 2026 progresses, the Bitcoin community faces a complex decision, balancing technical readiness, market confidence, and Bitcoin’s fundamental principles. Whether through voluntary updates, freezing protocols, or patient monitoring, the road ahead will test the adaptability of Bitcoin and its social consensus model.
