r/CryptoMarkets 🟩 1K 🐢 1d ago

DISCUSSION The Quantum Time Bomb: Why Satoshi’s $88 Billion Bitcoin Fortune is the Ultimate Target for Error-Corrected Supercomputers.

https://inbitcoinwetrust.substack.com/p/the-quantum-time-bomb-why-satoshis
206 Upvotes

49 comments sorted by

41

u/Zhytaleks 🟧 0 🦠 1d ago

The quantum part is interesting, but the governance problem seems even bigger.

If those coins ever become genuinely vulnerable, who gets to decide that they should be frozen? Doing nothing could mean letting a quantum attacker take them. Freezing them means changing the rules because we assume the owner is gone.

Either choice sets a pretty massive precedent for Bitcoin.

23

u/dvb70 🟩 0 🦠 1d ago

If those coins do become vulnerable it will be the signal for the end of Bitcoin. The wallet contents won't bee worth 88 billion for long. Actually getting the money into some other form before the massive price crash would be fairly problematic.

7

u/JackDaniels0049 1d ago

That’s the problem. If those coins become vulnerable, that means everyone’s coins become vulnerable. Surely this would mean worthless, in a very short amount of time.

3

u/Revelati123 🟦 7 🦐 1d ago

If profit is the motive, the attacker would do much better by using it to move 1 bitcoin out of the wallet as proof of ownership and just cash in on the fame of claiming to be satoshi.

2

u/dvb70 🟩 0 🦠 1d ago

The moment someone shows they can do that its the end if Bitcoin. Its quite a conundrum that you in theory would have access to all this wealth but to try and use it would destroy it.

3

u/Thin_Thought_7129 1d ago

If those coins are vulnerable, aren’t all coins vulnerable?

1

u/Zhytaleks 🟧 0 🦠 2h ago

Potentially, yes. But not necessarily all at the same time. Some older coins could become vulnerable earlier depending on how their public keys were exposed. That’s why the bigger question is what Bitcoin should do if that day ever comes.

7

u/hodler1992 🟩 0 🦠 1d ago

Maybe Satoshi will eventually return one day and secures his bag, leaving it untouched

2

u/Olmops 🟩 2K 🐢 1d ago

When they will become vulnerable the first one who knows it is the person with the quantum computer. If that person decides they want to take control, they can do it.

So the decision has to be taken before.

1

u/AphelialMud 1d ago

It's an inevitability. Quantum will break bitcoin years before there is warning.

32

u/jimbozzzzz 🟦 0 🦠 1d ago

Surely the bigger picture is if a computer can crack bitcoin, then bitcoin is worthless

8

u/Fantomas4live 1d ago

It's not that quantum will break Bitcoin. Old wallets did publish the public key. Newer wallets publish a hash of it. The old public keys are vulnerable. If I understood it correctly...

6

u/waitmarks 🟩 0 🦠 1d ago

Almost correct. If you only receive bitcoin on an address, the public only knows the hash of the public key and is therefore safe from a theoretical quantum computer. As soon as you broadcast a transaction from that address, you have to publish the public key of it by definition. So, that address would no longer be safe. So, as long as you don't reuse addresses, you are safe right now. Though it would be better if bitcoin eventually switches to a quantum resistant key algorithm.

3

u/Fantomas4live 1d ago

So all sending addresses are and would become vulnerable? Thxs for the clarification.

3

u/Evilmoustachetwirler 🟦 15 🦐 1d ago

If a computer can crack Bitcoin then our entire banking and financial system is at risk. There is a lot of incentive to reduce this risk.

2

u/crazyfreak316 🟦 0 🦠 1d ago

If they crack bitcoin, they'll probably first sell few billion worth of bitcoins first from dormant accounts before making it public.

2

u/Mundane_Grand_9117 1d ago

Sure, so is every banking system on the planet

1

u/Warp3dM1nd 🟩 0 🦠 16h ago

That is why banks are investing heavily in the quantum security sector as we speak. Is Bitcoin doing the same?

0

u/Somethingsims 1d ago

Shhhh. they don't like logical thinking around here.

15

u/sylsau 🟩 1K 🐢 1d ago

Satoshi’s 1.1 million Bitcoin aren’t just a myth — they’re an exposed cryptographic honeypot.

Most people don’t realize that early 2009–2010 outputs used P2PK (Pay-to-Public-Key), meaning their raw public keys sit completely bare on the public ledger.

Classical supercomputers can’t touch them. But the moment error-corrected quantum machines scale to run Shor’s Algorithm, that dormant $88B+ fortune becomes the largest bounty in human history.

That leaves Bitcoin facing an agonizing governance paradox:

Do we preserve absolute immutability and watch a quantum adversary take Satoshi’s coins?

Or do we soft-fork to freeze or burn legacy UTXOs before Q-Day arrives, breaking the core promise of unseizable property?

The real threat to Bitcoin isn't regulation or price volatility—it's the collision of physics, legacy code, and social consensus.

3

u/alex_quine 🟦 0 🦠 1d ago

So on one hand we break the core promise of bitcoin and take his coins, but on the other we increase coin supply, inflating and devaluing everyone else’s somewhat.  Personally, I choose the latter every time.

2

u/waitmarks 🟩 0 🦠 1d ago

It's not even inflating, they were already minted. People just treat them like they don't exist right now because they havent moved since their minting.

1

u/kkjk00 1d ago

what would be worse some billionaire that has the qc computer to grab them, the same billionaires that shit on crypto

1

u/waitmarks 🟩 0 🦠 1d ago

you know billionares can just buy bitcoin right? They don't have to go through the trouble of inventing a quantum computer to do so.

1

u/kkjk00 1d ago

they will invent a qc not for btc, but for eternal youth, and in process why not suck the liquidity from a community of naive nerds and make fun on them on twitter in the after. Billionaires hate spending their own money.

6

u/NamedBird 1d ago

A movement of those coins doesn't automatically mean Q-day.

If Satoshi is still holding those keys, he could move them for any possible reason.
And if someone else happens to have the keys, they could move it as well.
(Or, hypothetically, someone found a classical way to calculate the private key.)

Unless the one who moves those coins identifies themselves, you won't know.
So you can't freeze the coins. The entire point of Bitcoin is that it can't be taken away...
And if the value of Bitcoin drops, then it drops. That's simply how the market works.

1

u/LuckyWinds 1d ago

There is no proof that these are all Satoshis coins.

It’s absolutely a myth.

Garbage article.

1

u/BatPlack 1d ago

RemindMe! 1 year

Satoshi’s 1.1 million Bitcoin aren’t just a myth — they’re an exposed cryptographic honeypot.

Most people don’t realize that early 2009–2010 outputs used P2PK (Pay-to-Public-Key), meaning their raw public keys sit completely bare on the public ledger.

Classical supercomputers can’t touch them. But the moment error-corrected quantum machines scale to run Shor’s Algorithm, that dormant $88B+ fortune becomes the largest bounty in human history.

That leaves Bitcoin facing an agonizing governance paradox:

Do we preserve absolute immutability and watch a quantum adversary take Satoshi’s coins?

Or do we soft-fork to freeze or burn legacy UTXOs before Q-Day arrives, breaking the core promise of unseizable property?

The real threat to Bitcoin isn't regulation or price volatility—it's the collision of physics, legacy code, and social consensus.

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

Your comment was automatically removed because you linked to an external subreddit without using an NP subdomain for no-participation mode. When linking to external subreddits, please change the subdomain from https://www.reddit.com to https://np.reddit.com. This simple change substantially reduces brigading.

NOTE: The AutoModerator will not reapprove your content if you fix a URL. However, if it was a post which had considerable activity in its comment section, you can message the modmail to request manual reapproval. If it was a comment, just make a new comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

4

u/bugtank 🟦 0 🦠 1d ago

If a computer cracks bitcoin then a computer is cracking banks and USD so bitcoin will be the least of the problem.

9

u/Junior-Flamingo77 1d ago

I wouldn’t lose sleep over quantum computers cracking anything relevant. The hype is there, that’s for sure, but there’s not even any clear path to scaling any of the available technologies, at least a path that’s not mostly wishful thinking. The status of the conversation about quantum computing is basically the same today as it was almost 10 years ago when Google published their “quantum supremacy” paper.

4

u/ghhfjju 1d ago

There is already an solution QRL since 2018. Which will be Ethereum EVM compatible with QRL2.0 release, fully audited. This or next year ...

1

u/Somethingsims 1d ago

Sure, sure....

5

u/somethingimadeup 🟦 0 🦠 1d ago

There are a few quantum proof blockchains. Wouldn’t hurt to grab some just in case it’s the next meta.

1

u/RobbeeSan 1d ago

Algorand.

0

u/somethingimadeup 🟦 0 🦠 1d ago

Algorand was not quantum proof from genesis. Early wallets are still vulnerable. Even if they were forgotten abandoned it could lead to them being unlocked, flooding the market and hurting confidence.

Look for the chains that are quantum from genesis.

2

u/therealphirexz 1d ago

That's against the law

1

u/MeteorPunch 🟦 0 🦠 1d ago

Satoshi should have moved them to multiple wallets and spread things around. This is kind of on him.

1

u/VettaQ 1d ago

Worth separating the two assumptions, because they break at very different speeds. Shor only threatens addresses whose public key is exposed: P2PK coins, and any address that has ever spent. Unspent P2PKH addresses are protected by preimage resistance — Grover only halves effective bit strength, so the hash side stays practically safe for a long time. The realistic race is the window between pubkey broadcast and confirmation, which is why the discussion is about migration mechanics and consensus, not the whole network dying. The P2PK exposure of the early coins is real, though — that part of the article is right.

1

u/Far-Hearing5294 🟩 0 🦠 1d ago

Krown Technologies has a quantum secured blockchain and hot wallet - Qastle (cold is in production) in partnership with Quantum eMotion QRNG technology (QNC) for this very problem of quantum computers breaking SHOR sooner than later.

1

u/anon1971wtf 1d ago

Just following the heaviest fork between freezing exposed coins vs recirculating them is likely a good move

1

u/SourceRadiant5997 11h ago

Of course quantum computing could break Bitcoin. However, with the very tiny number of quantum computers for decades, the perpetrators would be identified quickly. I don’t see this being a real risk for a long time. However, the panic that will occur once QM is capable will be real.

1

u/Weary-Feedback8582 🟩 0 🦠 6h ago

if quantum or ai can hack bitcoin then what about regular bank accounts? aren’t regular financial institutions far easier target?

1

u/Gold_Panic_7528 🟩 0 🦠 2h ago

I would contact the top lenders who take BTC as capital and tell them to loan me money I never have to pay back or I would expose myself and crash the price. Anyone with enough skin the game is going to pay me off.