pull down to refresh

168 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 7h \ on: Quantum Computing Followup tech
This has been an excellent balance to the Chaincode paper on quantum resistance (which was my other main touch point with the issue).
The points I found relevant from that paper are:
  1. In all proposed solutions, migration takes months or more likely years. There is a reasonable argument that goes "since we can't make this change quickly, we should be hyper sensitive to developments in quantum computing."
  2. all the proposed solutions involve larger signature sizes. Therefore there is a real cost to needlessly adopting quantum resistance. (I don't believe the chain code paper authors draw this conclusion themselves).
write
preview
102 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 7h
One person's response to my thread was that mathematically we already know the encryption can be broken but there isn't a machine that can really do it yet. I can totally see that if that is the case that it is just a matter of time. The real question is how much time and I don't think we can know that as outsiders. Not really sure insiders know either.
reply