Adam Back shuts down Quantum FUD that could ‘likely crash Bitcoin’s market’

ambcryptoPublished on 2025-12-16Last updated on 2025-12-16

Abstract

Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, dismisses claims that quantum computing poses an immediate threat to Bitcoin, stating current technology is incapable of cracking the network. He estimates it could take 20-40 years for quantum computers to become stable and powerful enough to threaten BTC, and by then, the network could be upgraded for quantum security. While some investors, like Charles Edwards, urge faster action, experts note that existing quantum prototypes have high error rates and far fewer than the 2,500+ stable qubits required to break Bitcoin's encryption. In the meantime, holders are migrating to more secure Segwit addresses to reduce vulnerability.

Quantum computing has made some progress, but not to the extent that it could pose a threat to the Bitcoin network and related wallets.

According to Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream and a cypherpunk who was once mistaken for Satoshi, quantum computers right now can’t crash BTC.

He discredited a post that claimed that the only thing that could crash BTC by 99% from $87k to $3 is a quantum computer capable of cracking wallets and the entire network.

Last month, Back said that quantum computers could only become stable and pose a threat to BTC in the next 20-40 years.

Still, the network could be secure by the time the risk becomes real. In fact, Blockstream researchers are already developing proposals for upgrading the Bitcoin network to a quantum-secure one.

However, not everyone believes the threat is two decades away.

Why quantum-secure BTC is urgent

Perhaps one of the most vocal investors about the risks of quantum computing is Charles Edwards, CEO of Capriole Investments. According to him, BTC has lagged behind gold in terms of price performance this year because of the risk.

The best solution, he added, is to reach a consensus in 2026 and make the Bitcoin network quantum-resistant.

For perspective, quantum computers differ from current classical computers because they utilize the so-called qubits instead of typical solid-state chips that operate on 0 and 1. However, they are currently difficult to create, scale, and shield from errors (such as overheating).

So far, IBM has a working prototype with about 1000 qubits, while Google and Microsoft have managed 50 and 8 qubits, respectively. Alas, the error rates have been extremely high.

To crack the current Bitcoin cryptography, a quantum computer must have at least 2,500 logical and stable qubits that can operate for days without errors. That’s why experts like Adam Back view the threat as a long-term issue, rather than an immediate or mid-term risk.

Bitcoin holders seek relative security

In fact, most of the top firms that are pushing for quantum computers will be at risk if they develop one without proper safeguards. Based on this premise, even Strategy founder Michael Saylor has downplayed the mid-term threats posed by quantum computers to Bitcoin.

“Google and Microsoft won’t sell you a quantum computer that cracks modern cryptography because it’ll destroy them, the US government, and the banking system.”

In the meantime, some top holders are already migrating to more resistant Bitcoin addresses (Segwit, blue) from the latest format (taproot, purple).

According to BTC analyst Willy Woo, Segwit reduces “quantum long range attacks” if the address is not reused.

The number of Segwit addresses has been increasing since 2024.


Final Thoughts

  • Cryptography experts believe that it could take decades for quantum computers to crack the Bitcoin network.
  • Some investors have already migrated to relatively secure Segwit addresses.

Related Reads

Why Do You Always Lose Money on Polymarket? Because You're Betting on News, While the Pros Read the Rules

Why do you always lose money on Polymarket? Because you bet on news, while the pros study the rules. This article explains how top traders ("che tou") profit by meticulously analyzing market rules, not just predicting events. Polymarket, a prediction market platform, often sees disputes over event outcomes due to ambiguous rule wording. For instance, a market asking "Who will be the leader of Venezuela by the end of 2026?" was misinterpreted by many who bet on Delcy Rodríguez, assuming she held power. However, the rules specified "officially holds" as the formally appointed, sworn-in individual. Since Nicolás Maduro was still recognized as president officially, he won the market—even being in prison. To resolve such disputes, Polymarket uses a decentralized arbitration system via UMA protocol. The process involves: 1. Proposal: Anyone can propose a market outcome by staking 750 USDC, earning 5 USDC if unchallenged. 2. Dispute: A 2-hour window allows challenges with a 750 USDC stake; successful challengers earn 250 USDC. 3. Discussion: A 48-hour period on UMA Discord for evidence and debate. 4. Voting: UMA token holders vote in two 24-hour phases (blind then public). Outcomes require >65% consensus and 5M tokens voted; otherwise, four re-votes occur before Polymarket intervention. 5. Settlement: Results are final and automatic. Unlike traditional courts, Polymarket’s system lacks separation between arbitrators and stakeholders—voters often hold market positions, creating conflicts of interest. This leads to herd mentality in discussions and non-transparent outcomes without explanatory rulings, preventing precedent formation. Thus, success on Polymarket hinges on deep rule interpretation, not just event prediction, exploiting gaps between reality and contractual wording.

marsbit2h ago

Why Do You Always Lose Money on Polymarket? Because You're Betting on News, While the Pros Read the Rules

marsbit2h ago

DeepSeek Funding: Liang Wenfeng's 'Realist' Pivot

DeepSeek, a leading Chinese AI company, has initiated its first external funding round, aiming to raise at least $300 million at a valuation of no less than $10 billion. This move marks a significant shift from its founder Liang Wenfeng’s previous idealistic stance of rejecting external capital to maintain independence. Despite strong financial backing from its parent company, quantitative trading firm幻方量化 (Huanfang Quant), which provided an estimated $700 million in revenue in 2025 alone, DeepSeek faces mounting challenges. Key issues include a 15-month gap in major model updates, delays in its flagship V4 release, and the loss of several core researchers to competitors offering significantly higher compensation. The company is also undergoing a strategic pivot by migrating its infrastructure from NVIDIA’s CUDA to Huawei’s Ascend platform, a move aligned with China’s push for technological self-reliance amid U.S. export controls. However, DeepSeek lags behind rivals like智谱AI and MiniMax—both now publicly listed—in areas such as product ecosystem, multimodal capabilities, and commercialization. The funding round, though relatively small in scale, is seen as a way to establish a market-validated valuation anchor, making employee stock options more competitive and facilitating talent retention. It also signals DeepSeek’s transition from a pure research-oriented organization to a commercially-driven player in the global AI ecosystem.

marsbit2h ago

DeepSeek Funding: Liang Wenfeng's 'Realist' Pivot

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

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 S (S) are presented below.

活动图片