[Cryptography] Why full-fledged quantum computers might always be five years away

[qbtc.core]

Jon,

The article shared by Karmela Padavic-Callaghan raises a fascinating philosophical point: as long as we debate the shifting definition of a "full-fledged" quantum computer and treat it as a "perpetual five-year technology," the hardware horizon will indeed keep resetting.

However, from the perspective of cryptographic threat modeling, this philosophical ambiguity is a dangerous distraction.

To shatter the Nakamoto consensus, an adversary does not need to wait for a "fully individuated," universal quantum computer whose final ecosystem definition is still being settled. They solely need a specialized, application-specific quantum circuit optimized for a single, narrow task: executing Shor’s algorithm against secp256k1.

Whether the broader definition of a general-purpose quantum computer is 5 years or 50 years away is irrelevant to systems engineering. When the security of a foundational ledger relies on mathematical assumptions bound by physics, immutability cannot wait for philosophical consensus or shifting horizons.

Building a PQC-native Layer-1 (such as natively enforcing ML-DSA-65 at the storage layer) is an immediate engineering mandate. The lifeboat must be built before the flood arrives, regardless of whether philosophers have finished defining what the flood looks like.

— J.