Bitcoin Bombshell: Google’s 2029 Quantum Warning Sparks New Fear

bitcoinistОпубликовано 2026-03-31Обновлено 2026-03-31

Введение

Google's updated quantum threat model, moving its post-quantum cryptography migration deadline to 2029, has significant implications for Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. A new whitepaper from Google Quantum AI, alongside researchers including Justin Drake and Dan Boneh, suggests breaking the secp256k1 elliptic curve cryptography (used in Bitcoin) may require far fewer quantum resources than previously believed. The paper estimates Shor’s algorithm could break ECDSA keys in minutes using under 500,000 physical qubits. This has shifted the narrative, with experts now urging immediate transition plans. The paper highlights the risk of "on-spend" attacks against live transactions due to Bitcoin's 10-minute block time, while downplaying quantum risks to proof-of-work mining. Google chose to validate its findings via a zero-knowledge proof instead of full circuit disclosure, citing responsible disclosure concerns. The broader call is for vulnerable cryptocurrency communities to begin migrating to post-quantum cryptography without delay.

Google’s decision to pull its post-quantum cryptography migration timeline forward to 2029 has landed hard in Bitcoin and crypto, because the company did not just change a policy deadline. It paired that warning with a new whitepaper arguing that breaking the 256-bit elliptic curve cryptography used across major blockchains may require far fewer quantum resources than many in the market had assumed.

That is the link Castle Island Ventures General Partner Nic Carter seized on in a series of X posts on Tuesday, arguing that the answer to what Google “saw” was this paper itself. The whitepaper, dated March 30 and co-authored by researchers from Google Quantum AI alongside Justin Drake and Dan Boneh, lays out updated estimates for attacking the secp256k1 curve that sits at the center of Bitcoin-era signature security.

In Google’s formulation, Shor’s algorithm could solve the target problem with either no more than 1,200 logical qubits and 90 million Toffoli gates, or no more than 1,450 logical qubits and 70 million Toffoli gates. On a superconducting architecture, the authors say those circuits could run in minutes with fewer than half a million physical qubits.

That is the real shock to the Bitcoin threat model. Google’s March 25 blog post said the company moved to a 2029 migration target because of progress in quantum hardware, error correction and quantum factoring resource estimates, and said it had already adjusted its threat model to prioritize post-quantum migration for authentication services. The crypto paper then gave markets a concrete reason for why that deadline may have moved.

The paper is also unusual in how it handles disclosure. Rather than publishing the attack circuits in full, the authors say they used a zero-knowledge proof to validate the results without leaking sensitive details. Google framed that as a responsible-disclosure choice in a field where public discussion can itself create fear and instability, especially when the assets in question are bearer instruments with no recourse layer.

That choice fed directly into the reaction on X. Dragonfly’s managing partner Haseeb Qureshi called the result “wild,” writing: “Google Research demonstrates a ~20x more efficient implementation of Shor’s algorithm that could break ECDSA keys within minutes with ~500K physical qubits. Google is now are more confident on a 2029 post-quantum transition. We are no longer looking at mid 2030s, we could have quantum computers of this scale by the end of the decade.”

He added that Google’s decision not to publish the actual circuits, and instead publish a proof that they exist. “They believe this result is so severe that they are not publishing the actual circuits. They instead published a ZKP proving that they know of the quantum circuit with these properties. This is very atypical, showing Google thinks this is serious shit. All blockchains need a transition plan ASAP. Post-quantum is no longer a drill,” he added.


Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake pushed the same point even further. “Today is a monumentous day for quantum computing and cryptography. Two breakthrough papers just landed,” he wrote. “The results are shocking. I expect a narrative shift and a further R&D boost toward post-quantum cryptography.”

In a separate post, he added: “My confidence in q-day by 2032 has shot up significantly. IMO there’s at least a 10% chance that by 2032 a quantum computer recovers a secp256k1 ECDSA private key from an exposed public key. While a cryptographically-relevant quantum computer before 2030 still feels unlikely, now is undoubtedly the time to start preparing.”

For Bitcoin specifically, the most important part of the paper is not some vague future threat to “crypto,” but the distinction it draws between attacks on dormant or exposed keys and attacks on live transactions. The authors argue that fast-clock architectures such as superconducting and photonic systems could eventually enable “on-spend” attacks, where a public key exposed during transaction flow is broken quickly enough to race the original payment into a block.

Their estimate explicitly says fast-clock systems could solve ECDLP in about nine minutes on average, putting Bitcoin’s roughly 10-minute block cadence uncomfortably close to the attack window. The paper points to private mempools and commit-reveal schemes as possible mitigations, but treats migration to post-quantum cryptography as the actual answer.

Just as important, Google tries to narrow the panic. The paper says quantum attacks on Bitcoin proof-of-work via Grover’s algorithm are not a practical concern “in the next several decades,” arguing that discussion should stay focused on signatures, not mining. That matters because it shifts the debate away from network collapse scenarios and toward wallet design, key exposure, mempool privacy and upgrade coordination.

The broader message is hard to miss. Google’s paper ends by urging “all vulnerable cryptocurrency communities to join the migration to PQC without delay,” and its separate security timeline now points to 2029, not some comfortably distant date in the mid-2030s.

Bitcoin has spent years treating quantum risk as a long-range problem. What changed this week is that a major quantum lab put a much tighter engineering estimate around the threat, and some of the sector’s most technically literate observers immediately started talking less about whether the transition will be needed and more about how fast it has to begin.

At press time, Bitcoin traded at $67,475.

Bitcoin must reclaim the 200-week EMA, 1-week chart | Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView.com

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat is the main reason Google moved its post-quantum cryptography migration timeline to 2029, according to the article?

AGoogle moved its timeline to 2029 due to progress in quantum hardware, error correction, and new, more efficient resource estimates for breaking elliptic curve cryptography, as detailed in their recent whitepaper.

QHow many physical qubits does Google's new research estimate require to break ECDSA keys within minutes?

AGoogle's research estimates that breaking ECDSA keys could be achieved within minutes using fewer than half a million (~500,000) physical qubits on a superconducting architecture.

QWhat specific cryptographic algorithm is at the center of Bitcoin's signature security that the Google research targets?

AThe research targets the secp256k1 elliptic curve, which is used for ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm) and is at the center of Bitcoin's signature security.

QWhy did Google choose not to publish the full attack circuits in their whitepaper, and what method did they use instead?

AGoogle used a zero-knowledge proof to validate their results without publishing the sensitive attack circuits, framing it as a responsible-disclosure choice to avoid creating unnecessary fear and instability in the cryptocurrency market.

QAccording to the article, what is the estimated average time a fast-clock quantum system would need to solve the ECDLP and potentially attack a live Bitcoin transaction?

AThe paper estimates that fast-clock quantum systems could solve the Elliptic Curve Discrete Logarithm Problem (ECDLP) in about nine minutes on average, putting it dangerously close to Bitcoin's 10-minute block time for 'on-spend' attacks.

Похожее

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.

marsbit1 ч. назад

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

marsbit1 ч. назад

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.

marsbit1 ч. назад

Token Inefficient, Economy Tokenless

marsbit1 ч. назад

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

In 2026, a historic shift occurred in AI as major cloud providers' inference spending surpassed training spending for the first time, signaling a move from "building large models" to "using large models." This shifts the core challenge from computing power to the "memory wall"—the bottleneck of data movement (model weights, activations, KV Cache) between external DRAM and processors, where energy and latency from data transfer far exceed computation itself. Companies like Nvidia face GPU idle time due to bandwidth limits. In contrast, Cerebras Systems adopts a radical "wafer-scale" approach with its Wafer-Scale Engine (WSE). Instead of cutting a silicon wafer into many chips, Cerebras uses almost the entire wafer as one massive chip (WSE-3). This design provides 44GB of on-chip SRAM, delivering memory bandwidth thousands of times higher than traditional HBM (e.g., 21 PB/s vs. Nvidia B200). For LLM inference, weights are streamed layer-by-layer from external MemoryX storage to the chip, avoiding HBM bottlenecks. This results in token generation speeds 1.5–5 times faster than Nvidia's B200 in some models and significant advantages in first-token latency and long-context tasks. Additionally, Cerebras's architecture offers much lower interconnect power consumption (0.15 pJ/bit vs. GPU's ~10 pJ/bit). However, Cerebras faces challenges: SRAM scaling has slowed with advanced nodes, limiting future capacity gains; the chip requires specialized liquid cooling and custom software stacks; and its external I/O bandwidth (150 GB/s) is low compared to NVLink, hindering multi-system scaling for very large models. Competition is intensifying. Major players are pursuing three paths: 1) Developing proprietary inference ASICs (e.g., Google TPU, Microsoft Maia), 2) Leveraging advanced packaging (e.g., TSMC's SoW) to democratize wafer-scale-like integration, potentially eroding Cerebras's process advantage within a few years, and 3) Exploring optical interconnects for ultimate bandwidth. Commercially, Cerebras is transitioning from a hardware vendor to a service provider, facing the immense challenge of building high-power, specialized data centers to meet large contracts (e.g., 250MW/year from 2026–2028). In conclusion, the AI inference era presents a fundamental architectural trade-off. Cerebras opts for extreme physical optimization for low-latency, single-task performance, while Nvidia prioritizes versatility and massive cluster throughput. The path forward remains uncertain, with technology and business models still evolving in the race toward advanced AI.

marsbit1 ч. назад

Crossing the 'Memory Wall': The Wafer-Level Revolution and Computing Power Routes in the AI Inference Era

marsbit1 ч. назад

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

**Title: Has Bitcoin's Rebound Ended, Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?** **Summary:** Bitcoin's price has declined by 13% this week, signaling a potential return to late-stage bear market conditions. The price fell to around $67k, positioned between the Realized Price and Realized Cap Weighted Average. For the first time since early 2022, the Short-Term Holder cost basis has dropped below this key average, confirming a hallmark of late-cycle bear markets. Profitability metrics have collapsed sharply. The 7-day average of the Realized Profit/Loss ratio plummeted from a local high of 3.16 to 0.29, mirroring the February panic sell-off. Critically, the 90-day average never breached the threshold of 2, indicating the recent rally to $82k was a bear market bounce, not a structural shift. Realized losses surged to $1.35 billion daily, with $770 million coming from Long-Term Holders selling at a loss. This accelerating redistribution of supply from weak to strong hands is a necessary but ongoing process for a market bottom. The rally stalled almost precisely at the aggregate cost basis (~$83k) of US spot Bitcoin ETF investors, turning that level into strong resistance and leaving the average ETF holder underwater again. Spot market flows have turned decisively negative, showing sellers are dominating order books despite the price drop. While a significant futures long liquidation event cleared over $400 million in leverage, providing a potential reset, sustained spot demand is yet to materialize. Options markets continue to price in higher future volatility (Implied Volatility) than recent price action (Realized Volatility) has shown, with a persistent skew towards put options, indicating ongoing demand for downside protection. In conclusion, multiple metrics point to a fragile market structure. Resistance at the ETF cost basis, accelerating realized losses, dominant spot selling, and cautious options pricing all suggest the bear market trend persists. A sustainable recovery likely requires a resurgence of spot demand, ETF holders returning to profit, and a clear reduction in selling pressure.

marsbit1 ч. назад

Has Bitcoin's 'Rebound Ended', Officially Entering the Late Bear Market Phase?

marsbit1 ч. назад

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

In today's TechFlow Intelligence Briefing, several major tech stories highlight a growing theme of trust and credibility gaps across AI, crypto, and finance. AI company Anthropic has publicly called for a global pause in AI development, citing risks from Claude's "recursive self-improvement." Ironically, this coincides with reports the company is preparing for a massive IPO targeting a near $1 trillion valuation. This perceived hypocrisy, coupled with widespread user complaints about Claude's declining performance, is sparking debate over whether the safety warning is genuine or a competitive tactic. Meanwhile, in a substantive security move, Anthropic open-sourced a framework for AI-powered vulnerability discovery. In the crypto market, Bitcoin's price drop below $61,000 triggered over $1.16 billion in liquidations, flipping the market into a state where more BTC is held at a loss than at a profit, a historical bearish signal. On the corporate front, SpaceX's highly anticipated IPO is generating immense Wall Street excitement, with Goldman Sachs projecting 100x revenue growth by 2030. However, the S&P 500 has refused to fast-track the company's inclusion post-IPO, potentially limiting immediate institutional demand. Separately, ByteDance's AI app Doubao lost over 6 million monthly active users after introducing a subscription model, highlighting the challenges of AI monetization. Other notable developments include Nvidia certifying HBM4 memory from Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron; Cloudflare's acquisition of front-end tooling company VoidZero; and its CEO warning that bot traffic now exceeds human traffic online. The underlying narrative connects these events: a trust crisis. From AI firms' contradictory actions and crypto volatility to the clash between SpaceX's hyped narrative and institutional rules, a pattern is emerging where stated intentions and actual practices are increasingly misaligned.

marsbit1 ч. назад

TechFlow Intelligence Agency: Anthropic Calls for Global Pause in AI Development While Preparing for Trillion-Dollar IPO; SpaceX IPO Roadshow Heats Up, But S&P 500 Rejects Fast-Track Inclusion

marsbit1 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы

Популярные статьи

Как купить S

Добро пожаловать на HTX.com! Мы сделали приобретение Sonic (S) простым и удобным. Следуйте нашему пошаговому руководству и отправляйтесь в свое крипто-путешествие.Шаг 1: Создайте аккаунт на HTXИспользуйте свой адрес электронной почты или номер телефона, чтобы зарегистрироваться и бесплатно создать аккаунт на HTX. Пройдите удобную регистрацию и откройте для себя весь функционал.Создать аккаунтШаг 2: Перейдите в Купить криптовалюту и выберите свой способ оплатыКредитная/Дебетовая Карта: Используйте свою карту Visa или Mastercard для мгновенной покупки Sonic (S).Баланс: Используйте средства с баланса вашего аккаунта HTX для простой торговли.Третьи Лица: Мы добавили популярные способы оплаты, такие как Google Pay и Apple Pay, для повышения удобства.P2P: Торгуйте напрямую с другими пользователями на HTX.Внебиржевая Торговля (OTC): Мы предлагаем индивидуальные услуги и конкурентоспособные обменные курсы для трейдеров.Шаг 3: Хранение Sonic (S)После приобретения вами Sonic (S) храните их в своем аккаунте на HTX. В качестве альтернативы вы можете отправить их куда-либо с помощью перевода в блокчейне или использовать для торговли с другими криптовалютами.Шаг 4: Торговля Sonic (S)С легкостью торгуйте Sonic (S) на спотовом рынке HTX. Просто зайдите в свой аккаунт, выберите торговую пару, совершайте сделки и следите за ними в режиме реального времени. Мы предлагаем удобный интерфейс как для начинающих, так и для опытных трейдеров.

1.4k просмотров всегоОпубликовано 2025.01.15Обновлено 2026.06.02

Как купить S

Sonic: Обновления под руководством Андре Кронье – новая звезда Layer-1 на фоне спада рынка

Он решает проблемы масштабируемости, совместимости между блокчейнами и стимулов для разработчиков с помощью технологических инноваций.

2.3k просмотров всегоОпубликовано 2025.04.09Обновлено 2025.04.09

Sonic: Обновления под руководством Андре Кронье – новая звезда Layer-1 на фоне спада рынка

HTX Learn: Пройдите обучение по "Sonic" и разделите 1000 USDT

HTX Learn — ваш проводник в мир перспективных проектов, и мы запускаем специальное мероприятие "Учитесь и Зарабатывайте", посвящённое этим проектам. Наше новое направление .

1.8k просмотров всегоОпубликовано 2025.04.10Обновлено 2025.04.10

HTX Learn: Пройдите обучение по "Sonic" и разделите 1000 USDT

Обсуждения

Добро пожаловать в Сообщество HTX. Здесь вы сможете быть в курсе последних новостей о развитии платформы и получить доступ к профессиональной аналитической информации о рынке. Мнения пользователей о цене на S (S) представлены ниже.

活动图片