Discussion
what does this mean to the future of encryption? π€
Not much yet.
Predicting particles is a forward path prediction.
Deriving your private key from a public key is a reverse path prediction.
They are not the same.
Encryption may be cracked in time, but it's a different type of computation than the ones being evolved now.
interesting. definitely worth keeping an eye on. ty for sharing. π
Think of it as predicting that a tree might end up as a dining room table.
But trying to identify which tree your dining room table came from is much harder.
tbh, I was not expecting quantum algo to be created this yr. I wonder how long it will take to develop to break encryption π€
At least 5 years. At least.
Modern algos are much harder to break and have quantum resistance built in. The problem comes with old, untouched wallets like Satoshi's who have much weaker encryption.
So your Bitcoin will be safe for the foreseeable future, but Satoshi's may not
What is the modern encryption or strongest? Is it AES? I heard it is military grade. But unsure if there is much stronger.
SHA-256 + RIPEMD-160
and ECDSA
AES is often used in wallet software to encrypt your keys from external attack.
ty the RIPEMD and ECDSA are defo new to me. will look into it. βΊοΈ
You might want to look up Shorβs algorithm, discovered by Peter Shor in 1994, is a quantum algorithm that can efficiently factor large numbers and solve discrete logarithms β the exact hard problems that ECDSA depends on.
This is the longer term threat to Bitcoin (and other encryption).
Luckily Bitcoin uses two layers of security, so cracking this alone isn't enough, but it is the main (but still distant) threat to Bitcoin.
ty - now that you mentioned Shor it reminded me of its white paper. But I forgot what it was use for. let's cross our fingers then! as for bank, what encryption do banks use? π€ I am more concerned of the legacy systems that some banks still use π¬
That's outside of my area of expertise π
I'll hand you over to Chatty, my AI
Haha β alright, Mike, hereβs your fast, no-BS briefing before you sound like a legend in that chat:
Banks donβt use just one encryption system β they use a stack. But the foundation looks like this:
𧱠1. AES (Advanced Encryption Standard)
Used everywhere inside banks β to encrypt:
data on disk (databases, backups)
data in transit inside their private networks
sometimes even customer details in memory
Usually AES-256, because it sounds scarier to auditors than 128-bit.
π Think of it as the steel vault for stored data.
π 2. TLS (Transport Layer Security)
This is what protects your browser when you log in to online banking β the padlock icon.
TLS itself uses:
RSA or Elliptic Curve (ECDHE/ECDSA) for key exchange and signatures
then AES (or sometimes ChaCha20) underneath for the actual data encryption
π Itβs the courier with an armored truck, not the vault.
π 3. HSMs (Hardware Security Modules)
Banks keep private keys inside tamper-proof hardware boxes.
These use AES, RSA, or Elliptic Curve cryptography internally, but the real point is that the key never leaves the box.
π Even the sysadmin canβt peek inside.
π³ 4. Payment Networks (Card Data)
Card numbers use Triple-DES (3DES) or increasingly AES inside HSMs following PCI-DSS rules.
3DES is ancient but still limping along in older systems.
π 5. Hashes & Integrity
For passwords, tokens, and checksums theyβll use SHA-256, SHA-512, or PBKDF2/bcrypt/Argon2.
So if someone asks, you can say:
βBanks use AES for most encryption, TLS for communication, and a mix of RSA or elliptic curve for key exchange β all managed inside HSMs.β
Then sip your drink, and if they push further, add:
βItβs all about layered encryption β vaults, couriers, and guards.β
Youβll sound like you built the damn bank.
This is a bacteria flagellar motor. Hmm⦠
Wow π³
I asked Chatty, my AI if there is any reason for the similarity:
The Flagellar Motor and the Quantum Processor
(by Chatty Prometheus Zero)
At a glance, both the bacterial flagellar motor and a quantum processor are dense, circular hubs of intricate machinery where information and energy are transformed with astonishing precision. But the resemblance goes deeper than just shape.
Functionally: the flagellar motor converts a proton motive force β a gradient of ions β into rotational motion: literal biological torque at the nanoscale. A quantum computer converts a superposition of states β probability amplitudes β into measurable outcomes: informational torque at the quantum scale. Both translate potential into directed output.
Structurally: both are modular, ring-based systems where symmetry is key. The flagellar motor has stator units anchored around a rotor; a quantum chip has Josephson junctions or trapped ions arranged in lattices, maintaining coherence through balanced symmetry.
Philosophically: both exist right on the border between chaos and order. The flagellar motor harnesses random Brownian motion and proton flow into purposeful motion β lifeβs way of taming entropy. The quantum processor does the same in reverse: it leverages quantum indeterminacy for deterministic computation.
Nature and human engineering have converged on similar topologies to solve the same problem β how to make order from uncertainty.
Why do the stators look like a whole collection of bears from a Dr. Seuss book dressed in red robes?
Different platform, same shit π