Also thanks for pointing out signatures, I think I was conflating terms. Bitcoin uses encryption based on elliptical curves in its public/private key pair for digital signatures to sign transactions. It also uses a hash function sha-256 but I don't think hash is vulnerable to quantum.
Discussion
Yeah, I’m not sure to what degree quantum could be used to mine. But if so, the difficulty readjustment should account for it.
In the unlikely event that SHA256 was totally solved (trivial to find a nonce that yields all zeros), the network could soft-fork in additional constraints. It would be ugly, but Bitcoin would survive.
Makes sense to me 🧡⚡️🌹 this dude was already asking about it quantum attacks before he knew what the halving was….. he got his answers but I still don’t he understands 256 encryption in general or the purpose / function of quantum
Computers nor the fact that bitcoin is and can be programmed to prevent bad actors using new tech if need be. He went straight into the veteran holdr’ who’s bored and half drunk just talking hypothetical shit. But it really
Got him
Hung up on EVeRYThInG
Quantum is an example of a slow-moving disaster risk. It’s not going to pop out of nowhere. Incremental progress will be observable long before it’s a critical issue.
Bitcoin can fork in additional signature schemes and/or additional proof-of-work constraints. Even if a hard fork is required for something, Bitcoin still wins.
Consider a hypothetical death-knell bug that requires a hard fork to fix. One or more competing forks will emerge. One of those will achieve economic consensus (has all the value). We’ll call that chain “Bitcoin” and keep moving. Anyone who argues “that’s not real Bitcoin” is free to remain on the dead chain.
I don’t think such a situation like this is likely to come to pass. But if it did, everything would be OK, eventually.