Investing Updates: Bitcoin doesn’t have 20 years because the quantum threat is already here

Source:

https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-20-quantum-threat

ChatGPT:

The opinion piece argues that Bitcoin does not have decades to prepare for quantum computing threats, contrary to claims by some advocates who suggest a 20–40 year safety window. The author contends that the quantum threat is already material and accelerating, driven by rapid advances in hardware, governance constraints, and market exposure.

Recent developments underscore the urgency. IBM has announced major breakthroughs in quantum chip design and error correction, aiming for quantum advantage as early as 2026 and early fault-tolerant systems by 2029. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has similarly warned that elliptic-curve cryptography could be broken sooner than expected, possibly before 2028, and has urged a near-term shift to quantum-resistant cryptography. These views challenge the assumption that Bitcoin can afford to wait.

The risk is not theoretical. Deloitte estimates that around 4 million BTC—roughly 25% of usable supply—reside in addresses with exposed public keys vulnerable to quantum attacks. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could use Shor’s algorithm to derive private keys, allowing attackers to drain long-dormant wallets instantly. This vulnerability affects most blockchains, including Ethereum, but Bitcoin’s slow upgrade culture amplifies the danger.

The argument that Bitcoin can “upgrade later” is also criticized as unrealistic. Researchers suggest migrating Bitcoin to post-quantum cryptography could require prolonged downtime or reduced network capacity, an unacceptable risk for a trillion-dollar asset. Governance resistance, ideological divisions and the risk of chain splits further complicate any forced transition.

Meanwhile, governments are already acting. The EU has set a coordinated roadmap requiring post-quantum migration to begin by 2026 and largely complete by 2035. A delayed or chaotic crypto transition could trigger severe market disruption, from mass coin movements to mining centralization. The author concludes that proactive preparation is far less costly than waiting for a quantum-driven crisis.