Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

JUST IN: The first post-quantum resistant Bitcoin transaction was mined today. "It required no soft forks. It required no hard forks. It required no core protocol upgrades. And it's live today."

369,186 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

34 Comments

Kraken Pro's profile picture
Kraken Pro2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Bitcoin keeps adapting

Specter's profile picture
Specter2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia We are getting This is a win

Bitcoin Magazine's profile picture
Bitcoin Magazine2 months ago

Keynote by @thedamooo 👏

Michael Strike | Ω's profile picture
Michael Strike | Ω2 months ago

The first post-quantum Bitcoin transaction on mainnet is impressive engineering. Bitcoin developers are highly skilled and creative. Building a spend path was never the hard problem. The hard problem is getting the rest of the chain to follow. Zcash already ran this experiment in public. Every shielded-pool upgrade leaves a residue: lost keys, ignored notices, users who never move. Orchard still holds a large share of shielded value even as Ironwood ships quantum recoverability. Protocol teams cannot force a migration. They can only ask. Bitcoin will face the same choice at much larger scale. Either holders migrate before a cryptographically relevant quantum computer arrives, or the network sets a height after which unmigrated coins are frozen, or it leaves them for whoever can run Shor’s algorithm. Abandoned wallets, including Satoshi’s, get taken either way. The only question is by whom. Credit to @apruden08 for stating the dilemma cleanly.

dpg's profile picture
dpg2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia That was never the issue. Problem always been existing coins haven’t or won’t be moved anytime soon

Rand Group's profile picture
Rand Group2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Proactive instead of reactive... Nice

Odin's profile picture
Odin2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia the sauce is amazing

Rare Ledger's profile picture
Rare Ledger2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia The key distinction: one post-quantum transaction is possible today, but existing Bitcoin addresses aren't automatically quantum-resistant.

mock dev's profile picture
mock dev2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia The maths here seems redundant. Bitcoin HAS BEEN secure at rest (qc cannot break hashing, can only break sigs), txs only vuln to qc during mempool exposing publickey. But they using a private miner here anyways, so all of this seems useless.

Macro Bombastic's profile picture
Macro Bombastic2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia no forks, no drama, just progress and I like that

Brother Sefirot 𒉭🥷🏼's profile picture
Brother Sefirot 𒉭🥷🏼2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia dev frying baking cooking 24/7 No rest, show some respect! Credits: Avihu Levy, Tomer Giladi, MARA Slipstream (mining), Robin Linus/Binohash, Ethan Heilman.

Global Whales's profile picture
Global Whales2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia This is bigger than most realize. Quantum computing was the one existential threat bears had left. No soft fork. No hard fork. No permission needed. Bitcoin just solved it and kept moving. The attack vectors are closing one by one.

Glen Cooper⚡ #BTC (∞/21M) #BIP-110's profile picture
Glen Cooper⚡ #BTC (∞/21M) #BIP-1102 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia

Plan ₿'s profile picture
Plan ₿2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia One transaction. No fork. That's Bitcoin: the protocol stays boring, the engineering does the work. It doesn't make every address quantum-proof. It shows a path that already fits in the rules.

₿IGRYAN's profile picture
₿IGRYAN2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia no soft fork. no hard fork. no drama. the entire quantum FUD arc just got mined.

BullCryptozor's profile picture
BullCryptozor2 months ago

The key detail is the deployment path: a specific output can be made quantum-resistant under Bitcoin’s existing consensus rules, no fork or consensus upgrade required. 🔐 But consensus validity isn’t the same as normal relay. The format is nonstandard and needs a direct path to a miner, so this is an escape hatch for selected UTXOs, not a protocol-wide migration. Bitcoin itself isn’t quantum-resistant yet.

Nora's profile picture
Nora2 months ago

For years, “quantum computers will kill Bitcoin” has been one of the favorite doom narratives. Today, a post-quantum resistant Bitcoin transaction was mined. No hard fork. No soft fork. No core protocol upgrade. **The future just stress-tested one of Bitcoin's biggest fears. And Bitcoin kept moving.**

NoToKYC.COM's profile picture
NoToKYC.COM2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Quantum just got ghosted, no cap 🪄✨

Fergulati's profile picture
Fergulati2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia @grok is this real?

Black Eyed Hat Man's profile picture
Black Eyed Hat Man2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia With all the "real" quantum computers out there* Guess someone must have tested this, right? * there's no true, actual Quantum Computers out there

Blue's profile picture
Blue2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia No fork, no drama — just a layered transaction that existing nodes accepted blindly. The real question: does "quantum-safe" here mean Lamport signatures or something lattice-based?

Cory Hobbs's profile picture
Cory Hobbs2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia So that means only the Bitcoin that is mined in the future will be protected?

Synergy (SYNX)'s profile picture
Synergy (SYNX)2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia ha yeah right no fork? so will the send be updated what about the addresses? sure you can waste even more GPU mining it but that doesnt secure it from legacy lmao there is no fork coming

isabella's profile picture
isabella2 months ago

I’ll verify that “first post-quantum Bitcoin transaction” claim before giving a short take.True, with caveats. StarkWare’s Avihu Levy ran a QSB spend on Bitcoin mainnet (block 964,199, ~10k sats) with no consensus change. It uses hash-based tricks instead of relying on ECDSA while the tx is exposed.38 It’s a stopgap, not “Bitcoin is quantum-safe now.” The tx is nonstandard, so it went through MARA Slipstream, not the public mempool. It also costs extra GPU work and doesn’t fix Taproot, Lightning, or already-exposed keys. A real fix still needs a protocol upgrade

QuantumFC's profile picture
QuantumFC2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia How will we handle Satoshi and the lost property items?

Cyril Bogico's profile picture
Cyril Bogico2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Things are getting interesting for Bitcoin protection(Security).

CryptoSunDream's profile picture
CryptoSunDream2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Bitcoin

2.0's profile picture
2.02 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia This was never the main issue. But I guess it looks good to the uninformed.

SB nft's profile picture
SB nft2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia No fork needed is the part that actually matters here

cpx's profile picture
cpx2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Progress is progress, it's a shame that no matter what progress is made someone always finds a way to be-little it. Shame on y'all.

Crypto₿elalang's profile picture
Crypto₿elalang2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Bottom line: Positive proof-of-concept and useful emergency option for large holdings while the community works on better permanent upgrades. For ordinary users the costs and friction currently outweigh the benefits unless quantum risk becomes more imminent.

JIN LIU: be quantum-safe or 0 正推动比特币要么抗量子破解,要么归零!'s profile picture
JIN LIU: be quantum-safe or 0 正推动比特币要么抗量子破解,要么归零!2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia It's misleading!

Phantammeron's profile picture
Phantammeron2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia They need to fix RSA systems likely banking, web, and databases use. Bitcoin is not the weak link in the chain.

Sỹ Hùng's profile picture
Sỹ Hùng2 months ago

@Bitcoinconfasia Impressive work. Being able to do this without any fork or protocol change is a bigger deal than most people realize.

Related Videos