Quantum Computers and Bitcoin: Samson Mow Dismisses Worries About Future Risks

Recent discussions around quantum computing have raised fears that Bitcoin's security could be compromised by 2028. However, Samson Mow, a prominent advocate predicting a future Bitcoin price of $1 million, reassures that these concerns are misplaced. He argues that if quantum technology advances to the point of breaking current cryptographic standards, traditional banking systems will be the first to suffer.

Key Takeaways

Samson Mow believes that fears regarding quantum computers threatening Bitcoin are exaggerated.
If quantum computers can break cryptographic codes, traditional banks will face risks before Bitcoin.
The security of Bitcoin is more robust compared to the encryption used by banks.
Current quantum systems are not advanced enough to pose a genuine threat to Bitcoin.
Mow emphasizes that concerns about traditional financial systems should take precedence over hypothetical quantum threats.

Quantum Computers Killing Bitcoin? '$1 Million BTC' Advocate Samson Mow Says No Need to Worry

Quantum Computing’s Threat to Bitcoin: An Overstatement

This week, the issue of quantum computing has sparked renewed anxiety, especially with claims from a “doomsday clock” suggesting that Bitcoin keys could potentially be hacked by 2028. In response, Samson Mow, well-known for his bullish prediction of Bitcoin reaching $1 million, addressed these concerns in a recent interview, indicating that people are focusing on the wrong threats. He insists that Bitcoin is not among them.

In his consistent argument, Mow points out that should a powerful quantum computer be developed that could compromise elliptic curve cryptography, it would primarily target the shortcomings of the traditional banking system. He notes that banks utilize significantly weaker forms of encryption and currently do not have a clear strategy to upgrade their security measures.

_Source:_Quantum Doomsday Clock

Mow argues that there’s little cause for alarm about quantum computers "killing Bitcoin" when the more pressing risk lies in the potential breach of military infrastructure, which would likely occur before anyone could disrupt a blockchain.

The reality is that quantum systems would necessitate the use of thousands of logical qubits along with millions of physical qubits, coupled with error rates that are much better than what we currently see. Even in optimal scenarios, the challenges surrounding runtime remain substantial. Mow asserts that users of P2PKH (Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash) would still have sufficient time to transfer their coins before any attempts to compromise their security can be made.

Ultimately, Mow’s perspective is clear: Bitcoin is not the vulnerable link in a world influenced by quantum computing; rather, other systems will experience failure first.