Willy Woo says Bitcoin OGs will buy Satoshi's stash if a quantum hack occurs

cointelegraphPublicado em 2025-12-14Última atualização em 2025-12-14

Resumo

A debate emerged on social media regarding the potential scenario of a quantum computer hacking and dumping Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1 million BTC. YouTuber Josh Otten suggested this could crash Bitcoin's price to $3, but long-term holder Willy Woo countered that many original Bitcoin investors (OGs) would buy such a flash crash, ensuring the network's survival. Woo noted that around 4 million BTC in older "pay-to-public-key" (P2PK) addresses, including Satoshi's, are vulnerable because they expose public keys onchain, which a powerful quantum computer could use to derive private keys. Newer wallet types are more secure as they don’t reveal public keys. While some fear quantum computing could destroy crypto, experts like Blockstream’s Adam Back believe the threat is decades away, allowing time to adopt quantum-resistant cryptography. Analyst James Check added that the bigger risk is to Bitcoin’s market price, as the community is unlikely to preemptively freeze Satoshi’s coins before a quantum attack.

A debate broke out on social media on Saturday about the potential effects of a quantum computer hacking Satoshi Nakamoto’s Bitcoin (BTC) stash and then dumping those coins onto the market.

The debate began when YouTuber Josh Otten shared a price chart of BTC crashing to $3.00 and said that this could happen if a sufficiently powerful quantum computer emerges and steals pseudonymous Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1 million BTC and sells them.

“Many OGs would buy the flash crash. The Bitcoin network would survive; most coins are not immediately vulnerable,” long-term Bitcoin holder Willy Woo said.

Source: Josh Otten

However, there are about 4 million BTC held in pay-to-public-key (P2PK) addresses, including Satoshi’s coins, which show the full public key onchain when coins are spent, making them vulnerable to quantum attacks, Woo added.

Exposing a Bitcoin wallet’s full public key onchain exposes these wallets to quantum attacks in the future because a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could theoretically derive the private key from the public key in the future

Newer types of BTC wallet addresses are not as vulnerable to quantum attacks because they do not expose the full public keys onchain, and if the public key is not known, then a quantum computer cannot generate the paired private key from that data.

Satoshi Nakamoto’s Bitcoin holdings. Source: Arkham Intelligence

The Bitcoin and crypto communities continue to debate the potential effects of quantum computing on Bitcoin and the encryption technology that underpins cryptocurrencies, with some arguing that quantum computing will be the death of the industry.

Related: VanEck boss questions Bitcoin’s privacy, encryption against quantum tech

Bitcoin OG Adam Back says the threat of quantum computers is decades away

Adam Back, an early Bitcoin holder, cypherpunk and co-founder of Bitcoin technology company Blockstream, said that BTC will not face a quantum threat in the next 20-40 years.

Back argued that there is plenty of time to adopt post-quantum cryptography standards, which already exist, before a quantum computer powerful enough to crack modern encryption and cybersecurity standards is built.

Market analyst James Check said that quantum computing does not threaten Bitcoin’s technology because users will migrate to quantum-resistant addresses by the time a viable quantum computer emerges.

The quantum threat poses more of a threat to Bitcoin’s market price because there is “no chance” that the Bitcoin community will agree to freeze Satoshi’s coins before a quantum computer hacks his wallets and puts the coins back into circulation, Check said.

Magazine: Quantum attacking Bitcoin would be a waste of time: Kevin O’Leary

Criptomoedas em alta

ctr
CitreaCTR
wstusdt
wrapped stUSDTWSTUSDT
apr
aPrioriAPR
ctx
Cryptex FinanceCTX
audio
AudiusAUDIO
comp
CompoundCOMP
mantra
MantraMANTRA
xvs
VenusXVS
waxl
AxelarWAXL
bill
Billions NetworkBILL
pyth
PYTH (Pyth)PYTH
rune
THORChainRUNE
velodrome
Velodrome FinanceVELODROME
brev
BrevisBREV
cake
PancakeSwapCAKE

Leituras Relacionadas

Circle Q2 revenue falls short of Wall Street estimates

Circle reported second-quarter fiscal 2026 revenue and reserve income of $701 million, a 7% year-over-year increase, but slightly missed Wall Street estimates averaging $713.32 million. Net income from continuing operations was $48 million. The company noted a 5% rise in reserve income, driven by a 25% increase in average USDC circulation. Despite the earnings miss, shares rose 5.7% in pre-market trading. Circle announced the founding validators for its upcoming Arc blockchain, set to launch on September 16, including major firms like BlackRock, Visa, and Mastercard. Management raised its full-year guidance for other revenue, which includes Arc token presale revenue, to $310-$330 million from $150-$170 million. The results come amid a broader stablecoin market contraction, with total supply falling to $153 billion. Circle's USDC, with a $72 billion circulating supply, remains the second-largest stablecoin. According to a Talos spokesperson, USDC facilitated 72% of the $15.6 trillion in adjusted on-chain transfer volume in the quarter.

cointelegraphHá 16m

Circle Q2 revenue falls short of Wall Street estimates

cointelegraphHá 16m

Playing the "Decoupling" Card Again? Domestic Optical Modules Face a Stress Test

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reportedly drafting a ban on importing new models of Chinese-made optical transceiver modules, with a potential implementation target of 2026. This "decoupling" move comes as Chinese firms, led by industry leaders like Zhongji Innolight and Eoptolink, dominate the global optical module market with over 60% share, and hold an even larger position in the high-speed 800G and 1.6T segments critical for AI data centers. Market reactions were mixed: U.S. optical module stocks initially rose, while Chinese A-shares opened lower but largely recovered by the close. Analysis suggests a complete U.S. decoupling from Chinese modules faces significant hurdles. North American cloud giants (Meta, Google, Microsoft, Amazon) and NVIDIA have massive demand for high-speed modules, estimated at around 40 million units in 2026. U.S. manufacturers' combined monthly production capacity for these modules is less than one-fifth that of a single major Chinese player like Zhongji Innolight, which reported production of 23.76 million units in 2025. Chinese companies are heavily reliant on the U.S. market, with over 90% of revenue for top firms coming from overseas, primarily the U.S. However, they have begun mitigating risks by establishing assembly plants in Southeast Asia and Mexico. Industry observers note the final impact depends on whether any potential U.S. restrictions target specific companies or products based on origin. Past U.S. sanctions on Chinese tech firms have often spurred increased domestic R&D and market diversification. Despite initial stock volatility, shares of major Chinese optical module companies pared losses, indicating market belief in the sector's resilience and the practical difficulties of abruptly replacing Chinese supply.

marsbitHá 25m

Playing the "Decoupling" Card Again? Domestic Optical Modules Face a Stress Test

marsbitHá 25m

When the Competition in Chip Manufacturing Equipment Stops Being Just About Who Is More Advanced

The competition in chip manufacturing equipment is no longer solely about who has the most advanced technology. While performance, yield, and cost remain key, U.S. export controls are adding a critical new dimension: long-term supply chain reliability. Major chipmakers like Samsung and SK Hynix, despite having mature supply chains with leading American and European vendors, are reportedly evaluating etching equipment from China's AMEC for their Chinese factories. This move is not primarily about immediate replacement or AMEC's current capabilities. Instead, it's a risk mitigation strategy. Companies are concerned that future U.S. policies could disrupt their access to spare parts, software updates, and maintenance for existing equipment over its decade-long lifespan. For chipmakers investing billions in fabs with long planning cycles, this policy-induced uncertainty is a significant new risk. The U.S., through its controls, is inadvertently eroding the very reliability and certainty that were foundational strengths of its equipment suppliers. This creates a pivotal shift for Chinese semiconductor equipment. Previously seen largely as a "domestic replacement" option when foreign gear was unavailable, they are now being assessed as potential "contingency suppliers" by global players—even before a supply disruption occurs. This provides a crucial entry point for validation in real production lines, which is essential for iterative improvement. Chinese equipment, particularly in areas like etching, has progressed from prototypes to participating in mass production within China, gaining valuable experience. However, this does not signify full global competitiveness. Gaps remain in advanced lithography, metrology, and other key tools. The current evaluations are largely confined to foreign firms' China-based fabs, not their global procurement networks. The core change is in the decision-making framework. Efficiency-driven globalization favored single, optimal suppliers. An era of heightened geopolitical risk is forcing companies to value "replaceability." While technical prowess remains paramount, supply chain certainty is now being factored into a device's competitive equation. Ultimately, U.S. policies have not made Chinese equipment more advanced, but they have given global customers a compelling reason to start testing it. The competition has expanded: it's no longer just about who is more advanced, but also about who can be relied upon to stay.

marsbitHá 25m

When the Competition in Chip Manufacturing Equipment Stops Being Just About Who Is More Advanced

marsbitHá 25m

Trading Volume Increased by 2.5x, Why Did Circle's Revenue Only Grow by 7%?

Circle's Q2 performance presents a seemingly contradictory picture: the transaction volume of its stablecoin USDC surged 151% year-over-year to $14.8 trillion, while its "Total Revenue & Reserve Revenue" grew by only 7% to $701 million. This discrepancy highlights the core of Circle's business model. Revenue is primarily driven not by transaction volume, but by the average amount of USDC in circulation and the yield generated from its reserves. Key points: 1. **Revenue Drivers:** Over 90% of revenue comes from "reserve income," which is a function of average USDC circulation (up 25% YoY) and the reserve yield (which fell by 66 basis points). The net effect was a mere ~5% increase in reserve income. 2. **Transaction vs. Revenue:** High transaction volume indicates robust usage of USDC for payments and settlements, but does not translate directly to revenue. It must first convert into a sustained, average circulating balance. 3. **Cost Structure:** After accounting for distribution and other costs, the metric "Revenue Less Direct Costs" (RLDC) grew faster than total revenue, with its margin improving. However, rising operating expenses (up 23% YoY) meant that Adjusted EBITDA growth was limited to 8%. 4. **New Initiatives:** Circle reported progress on new networks like the Circle Payments Network and upcoming products (Arc, Agent Stack), but these are currently measured by adoption metrics (e.g., transaction run-rate, number of services) rather than material revenue contribution this quarter. In summary, the financial results are determined by the interplay of USDC circulation, reserve yields, and cost structures, while high transaction volume signals underlying network strength that has not yet fully flowed through to the income statement.

marsbitHá 43m

Trading Volume Increased by 2.5x, Why Did Circle's Revenue Only Grow by 7%?

marsbitHá 43m

Samsung China, Another Step Back

Samsung China Takes Another Step Back Samsung Electronics is further retreating from the Chinese consumer market. Following the exit of its home appliance business in May, its mobile phone division is now reportedly scaling down. Stores with monthly sales below 300,000 RMB are being closed in several cities. Data shows Samsung's smartphone market share in China has plummeted to 0.1% in Q2 2026, a stark contrast to its 22% global leadership. The decline is attributed to intense competition from domestic brands offering better value, higher specs (like faster charging), and superior localization in software and services. Samsung's premium pricing and less adapted One UI system have struggled against rivals like Huawei, Xiaomi, and Honor. This consumer electronics retreat coincides with Samsung's record-breaking semiconductor profits, driven by the AI boom. In Q2 2026, the chip division contributed nearly all operating profit, while the mobile and home appliance unit posted its first-ever operating loss. Internal dynamics, like the chip division charging market prices to the mobile unit, have increased cost pressures. Samsung's strategy now appears to be a focused retreat towards the ultra-premium segment in China, similar to its global push in high-end foldables like the Galaxy Z Fold8. The company is likely to retain only key stores in major cities to serve a niche, high-end clientele. While its deep semiconductor reserves offer a cushion, this shift away from mass-market consumer electronics reduces business diversification. The move is pragmatic but signifies a fundamental transformation; Samsung is ceding mass-market influence and betting heavily on its semiconductor strength and a narrowed premium product focus.

marsbitHá 47m

Samsung China, Another Step Back

marsbitHá 47m

Trading

Spot

Artigos em Destaque

Como comprar WOO

Bem-vindo à HTX.com!Tornámos a compra de WOO (WOO) simples e conveniente.Segue o nosso guia passo a passo para iniciar a tua jornada no mundo das criptos.Passo 1: cria a tua conta HTXUtiliza o teu e-mail ou número de telefone para te inscreveres numa conta gratuita na HTX.Desfruta de um processo de inscrição sem complicações e desbloqueia todas as funcionalidades.Obter a minha contaPasso 2: vai para Comprar Cripto e escolhe o teu método de pagamentoCartão de crédito/débito: usa o teu visa ou mastercard para comprar WOO (WOO) instantaneamente.Saldo: usa os fundos da tua conta HTX para transacionar sem problemas.Terceiros: adicionamos métodos de pagamento populares, como Google Pay e Apple Pay, para aumentar a conveniência.P2P: transaciona diretamente com outros utilizadores na HTX.Mercado de balcão (OTC): oferecemos serviços personalizados e taxas de câmbio competitivas para os traders.Passo 3: armazena teu WOO (WOO)Depois de comprar o teu WOO (WOO), armazena-o na tua conta HTX.Alternativamente, podes enviá-lo para outro lugar através de transferência blockchain ou usá-lo para transacionar outras criptomoedas.Passo 4: transaciona WOO (WOO)Transaciona facilmente WOO (WOO) no mercado à vista da HTX.Acede simplesmente à tua conta, seleciona o teu par de trading, executa as tuas transações e monitoriza em tempo real.Oferecemos uma experiência de fácil utilização tanto para principiantes como para traders experientes.

206 Visualizações TotaisPublicado em {updateTime}Atualizado em 2026.06.02

Como comprar WOO

Discussões

Bem-vindo à Comunidade HTX. Aqui, pode manter-se informado sobre os mais recentes desenvolvimentos da plataforma e obter acesso a análises profissionais de mercado. As opiniões dos utilizadores sobre o preço de WOO (WOO) são apresentadas abaixo.

活动图片

Categorias popularesright-arrow

Etiquetas Popularesright-arrow