New research says quantum computers won’t break Bitcoin mining — but here’s what could

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-04-08Last updated on 2026-04-08

Abstract

New research challenges the widely held concern that quantum computers could overpower Bitcoin's mining system. The study, titled "Kardashev-scale Quantum Computing for Bitcoin Mining," concludes that while quantum algorithms like Grover’s could theoretically accelerate mining, real-world constraints—such as reversible hashing, error correction, and Bitcoin’s 10-minute block window—make such an attack impractical. A viable quantum mining operation would require millions of qubits and energy consumption comparable to a national power grid, approaching Kardashev Type II civilization levels. Instead, the more immediate quantum threat lies in cryptographic vulnerabilities: Shor’s algorithm could break the public-key cryptography securing Bitcoin wallets. This shifts the focus from mining competition to the need for quantum-resistant security upgrades.

A new academic study is challenging one of crypto’s most widely discussed risks — that quantum computers could one day overpower Bitcoin’s mining system.

The paper, Kardashev-scale Quantum Computing for Bitcoin Mining, finds that while quantum algorithms can theoretically speed up mining, the real-world requirements make such an attack impractical at any foreseeable scale.

Instead, the research points to a different, more credible quantum risk — one that targets Bitcoin’s cryptographic foundations rather than its mining process.

Quantum mining advantage breaks down in practice

The idea behind quantum mining is rooted in Grover’s algorithm, which can speed up search processes. Applied to Bitcoin, this could, in theory, allow quantum miners to find valid blocks faster than classical machines.

However, the study argues that this advantage collapses under real-world constraints.

Quantum mining would require complex reversible hashing operations, extensive error correction, and highly coordinated systems operating within Bitcoin’s 10-minute block window.

Each of these factors adds significant overhead, reducing the practical speed advantage.

Even under optimistic assumptions, the resources required are extreme. The paper estimates that a viable quantum mining setup would require millions of qubits and energy consumption on the scale of a national power grid.

At current Bitcoin difficulty levels, those requirements approach those of a Kardashev Type II civilization, which would harness energy at a stellar scale.

In short, the gap between theory and reality remains vast.

The real constraint: time and scale

Bitcoin’s mining process is not just about computational power — it is also time-bound.

Because the network adjusts difficulty to maintain a roughly 10-minute block interval, any miner must operate within a fixed timeframe. This limits how much advantage a quantum system can extract from faster search capabilities.

To overcome this, a quantum attacker would need to run massive fleets of machines in parallel, significantly increasing both energy and hardware demands. This scaling problem further weakens the feasibility of quantum mining as a realistic threat.

A different quantum risk emerges

While the study dismisses quantum mining as impractical, it highlights a more pressing concern — cryptographic security.

Quantum computers running Shor’s algorithm could eventually break the public-key cryptography used to secure Bitcoin wallets.

Unlike mining, this attack vector does not depend on competing with network-wide hash power, making it a more direct and plausible risk.

This distinction is critical, as it shifts the focus of quantum-related discussions in crypto from mining dominance to long-term security upgrades.

Reframing the quantum debate

The findings suggest that concerns about quantum computers overtaking Bitcoin mining may be misplaced.

Rather than posing an immediate threat to network consensus, quantum computing is more likely to challenge how digital assets are secured at the wallet level.

For the industry, this implies that future-proofing Bitcoin may depend less on mining dynamics and more on transitioning to quantum-resistant cryptography.


Final Summary

  • New research suggests quantum computers are unlikely to disrupt Bitcoin mining, as real-world constraints eliminate most theoretical advantages.
  • The more credible quantum threat lies in cryptographic vulnerabilities, shifting focus toward long-term security upgrades rather than mining competition.

Related Questions

QWhat is the main finding of the research paper 'Kardashev-scale Quantum Computing for Bitcoin Mining' regarding quantum computers and Bitcoin mining?

AThe research finds that while quantum algorithms can theoretically speed up Bitcoin mining, real-world constraints such as complex reversible hashing operations, extensive error correction, and the 10-minute block window make such an attack impractical at any foreseeable scale.

QWhat specific algorithm is mentioned as the theoretical basis for quantum mining, and why does its advantage break down in practice?

AGrover's algorithm is mentioned as the theoretical basis for quantum mining. Its advantage breaks down in practice due to the significant overhead from reversible hashing operations, error correction requirements, and the need to operate within Bitcoin's fixed 10-minute block timeframe.

QAccording to the study, what are the extreme resource requirements estimated for a viable quantum mining setup?

AThe paper estimates that a viable quantum mining setup would require millions of qubits and energy consumption on the scale of a national power grid, approaching the energy requirements of a Kardashev Type II civilization.

QWhat does the research identify as the more pressing and credible quantum risk to Bitcoin, and which algorithm is associated with it?

AThe research identifies the breaking of Bitcoin's public-key cryptography as the more pressing and credible quantum risk. This attack vector is associated with Shor's algorithm.

QHow does the study suggest the focus of quantum-related discussions in crypto should shift?

AThe study suggests that the focus should shift from concerns about quantum computers overtaking Bitcoin mining to the long-term security upgrades needed to transition to quantum-resistant cryptography for securing digital assets at the wallet level.

Related Reads

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

NEAR Returns to AI Origins: From Payroll Struggles to Blockchain, Now Focusing on AI Agents and Privacy NEAR Protocol's journey began not with grand blockchain ambitions, but from a practical hurdle: its AI startup founders, including Transformer paper co-author Illia Polosukhin, couldn't efficiently pay international developers in 2017. This led them to pivot and build a high-performance, scalable blockchain. After years navigating various crypto narratives like sharding and cross-chain interoperability, NEAR is now leveraging its AI roots to re-enter the AI arena. A key driver is its "NEAR Intents" layer, which abstracts complex cross-chain transactions. Users simply state their goal (e.g., swap BTC for ETH), and a solver network finds the optimal route. This system has processed over $20B in cross-chain volume, generating significant fee revenue. A major growth area is private transactions via "Confidential Intents/Swaps," which hide trade details until settlement to protect against MEV and front-running. Remarkably, private swaps recently accounted for over 40% of NEAR's transaction volume, highlighting strong demand but also potential regulatory scrutiny. With its AI-founder pedigree, NEAR is positioning itself at the intersection of blockchain, AI agents, and privacy, aiming to become infrastructure for the emerging agent economy while navigating the challenges of its rapid adoption.

marsbit2h ago

Near Returns to the AI Stage: Transformation into a Public Chain Due to 'Payroll Difficulties,' Agent and Privacy Emerge as New Growth Narratives

marsbit2h ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

In recent discussions, Vitalik Buterin has frequently emphasized the concept of "CROPS," a framework defining core values for Ethereum's development. CROPS stands for Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, and Security. Initially outlined in the Ethereum Foundation's "EF Mandate," it represents a commitment to user sovereignty, ensuring that the network resists external control, remains open, protects privacy, and prioritizes security. The relevance of CROPS extends beyond Ethereum's foundational principles, becoming crucial in the context of AI integration. As AI agents begin handling wallet operations and automated transactions, the risk increases that users may cede control over their digital assets, privacy, and intentions to centralized AI service providers. A "CROPS AI" would therefore emphasize local execution where possible, privacy-preserving remote model calls (e.g., using zero-knowledge proofs), and transparent, verifiable processes to maintain user agency. Vitalik highlights a significant convergence between "CROPS Ethereum access layer" and "CROPS AI." Both address the same fundamental challenge: how users can access powerful services—be it blockchain data via RPCs or AI models—without exposing sensitive information or relinquishing ultimate control. This intersection points toward a future digital entry point that is more private, secure, and user-controlled. Ultimately, CROPS is not merely an abstract ideal but a practical guidepost. It steers development—from protocol resilience and wallet design to AI agent safety—towards a future where users retain self-sovereignty even as digital systems grow more complex and powerful. In an era of accelerating AI adoption, these "slow variables" of censorship resistance, openness, privacy, and security may define Ethereum's enduring value.

marsbit2h ago

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly is This Set of 'Slow Variables' That Vitalik Repeatedly Emphasizes?

marsbit2h ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

Silicon Valley investor and "Godfather of Startups" Steve Hoffman warns that combining Web3 with AI is likely a trap, not a promising venture. In an interview, Hoffman argues that while AI is a foundational technology touching all industries, Web3 adds complexity, friction, and regulatory risk without solving mainstream consumer or business needs. He advises founders to focus on deep, specialized applications where startups can out-iterate giants, rather than on generic features easily replicated by large tech companies. Hoffman observes that Silicon Valley will lead foundational AI research, while China excels at rapid, large-scale application and commercialization, particularly in robotics. He stresses that AI-driven autonomous agents capable of collaborative, multi-step tasks are 2-4 years away, which will cause significant job displacement. The solution is not to slow AI but to redesign business models around human-AI collaboration and reform social systems like education and retraining. For startups, Hoffman recommends focusing on vertical, expertise-heavy domains to build defensibility. He sees major opportunities in AI fraud detection and cybersecurity. Key founder mindsets include systemic thinking over feature-focus, relentless customer centricity, building adaptive teams, and deeply understanding AI's capabilities and limits. Hoffman is also leading a non-profit initiative to establish university centers aimed at training future leaders in responsible, human-value-aligned AI innovation.

marsbit3h ago

Silicon Valley 'Startup Guru' Steve Hoffman: Web3 + AI Could Be a Trap

marsbit3h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

The article "Tokens Aren't Economical, Economics Aren't Tokenized" analyzes a pivotal shift in the AI industry from a technology-driven narrative to one dominated by capital efficiency. It highlights two concurrent trends: a severe capital shortage due to the exorbitant and recurring costs of compute (e.g., OpenAI's high burn rate) and a wave of corporate spin-offs where major tech companies are separating their AI units (like Kuaishou's Kling and Baidu's Kunlunxin). The core argument is that AI's "anti-internet" business model, where user growth increases costs rather than profits, has created a disconnect between high valuations and actual cash flow. Spin-offs address this by allowing AI assets to be valued independently. Within a parent company, they are seen as cost centers, but as standalone entities, they are priced based on their growth potential and scarcity in the primary market, leading to massive valuation premiums (e.g., Kling's estimated value tripling post-spin-off). The industry is at an inflection point, moving from "model worship" to "value realization." The competition is evolving from a pure compute (GPU) race to a broader focus on systemic efficiency and full-stack engineering (involving CPUs and orchestration) to achieve viable commercialization. The year 2026 is framed as a critical moment where the industry must definitively answer how to economically translate AI capability into tangible business value, reshaping the sector's future power structure.

marsbit3h ago

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

363 Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片