pull down to refresh

It's not as if this topic hasn't been discussed. People who know much more about quantum computing and bitcoin than Nic or I have been discussing it for years. It seems like he's simply not happy that these people have come to a different conclusion than he has.

36 sats \ 3 replies \ @teemupleb 3h

Fair point. And since his VC background, I guess it would be in his incentives that some Bitcoin quantum businesses got traction.

reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 2h

That's the best point. I can't put my hands on it now, but @Scoresby linked to a good article about how ridiculous it is to dismiss the barriers to quantum computing as mere "engineering issues." Not to mention the fact that if this fantasy comes to pass, the entire world financial system is a far bigger and less secure target. Somehow the banks never get punished with this fud.

reply
57 sats \ 1 reply \ @teemupleb 2h

Not constructive to compare banks' response to the quantum threat to Bitcoin's because banks can just update their ledger and bam, it's quantum-proof. Bitcoin's decentralized network needs more coordination.

reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 2h

I guess that's true. It's more complicated than just a ledger, though. Gaining full access to internal communications of banks, military, governments, etc. seems like a juicier target than bitcoin.

reply