With the ongoing discussions about quantum computing and its potential to disrupt Bitcoin’s cryptography in the future, I was wondering how the community views this risk for Litecoin.
Do you think Litecoin’s security model makes it equally vulnerable, or are there differences that could make it more resilient?
If quantum risk is real in the long-term, what kind of upgrades or defenses should Litecoin developers consider?
Interested to hear your thoughts on whether this is just theoretical fear for now, or something the Litecoin ecosystem should start preparing for.
I think before you and I can build one, or buy one we need a decade at least.
So don’t worry about security from the quantum computing. Worry more about mostly unsolicited emails with attachments or other forms of phishing.
That’s a very fair point. most hacks today don’t come from breaking cryptography but from phishing, social engineering, or weak security practices. Even the strongest blockchain can’t protect against someone clicking the wrong link.
Still, I think it’s useful to keep the quantum debate alive in the background. For everyday users it might not matter yet, but for governments or institutions holding large reserves of crypto, they have to think on a 10+ year horizon.
For Litecoin, maybe the real question is: should the community start researching quantum-resistant solutions early, or wait until the technology becomes a real, near-term risk?
Right now it’s more of a long-term concern. Current quantum machines aren’t powerful enough yet, but planning post-quantum cryptography upgrades early could help both Litecoin and Bitcoin stay ahead.
Quantum computing is just theoretical and somewhere in between hype and scam.
Breakthroughs are made by Google and Microsoft, both tied to the ‘Deep State’ (for want of a better word)
Google and Microsoft have not released any schematics which would allow genuine evaluation
Quantum Science itself is far from settled and is mostly theory.
The technology to manipulate circuits needed for computation is a million times smaller than our smallest current tech and needs to be operated at absolute zero temperatures.
From the perspective of those defending the financial status quo, it would make sense to scare current devs away from tech working perfectly well to something much less proven.
Quantum Computing would wreck all the digital infrastructure of banks; it’s doubtful they’d let this happen.
So, I’m not worried, and the real worry is that FUD put out about it will scare people into making stupid decisions.
Having said all that, by all means, we could theorize some defenses in advance. It’s good to think about these things. But we just need to not fall for some imaginary threat.
You actually can should you be able to slip by the likes of AWS, Microsoft, Google, and IBM As those are already offer real quantum processors and simulators today – usable. And for a price. as – usable on a pay-per-use basis, integrated into existing services. No one needs to acquire their own hardware or wait for a specific architecture to become established.
And there things rested for some years until, in 1999, some researchers in Japan realised that if you could control the up and down ratcheting, you might use it to build a device that could process bits or, rather, since this would be a quantum device, qubits. That led to the invention of what are called phase qubits, which are oscillations between quantised energy levels in a Josephson junction. Those have led, in turn, to a more robust qubit design called a transmon, which Dr Devoret helped to develop.
Whether quantumcomputers will live up to the hype which now surrounds them remains to be seen. As does how much they will bemuse the world if they do.