See More CryptosHome

QC

Show Trading View Graph

Mentions (24Hr)

0

0.00% Today

Reddit Posts

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Gold looks like it will drop significantly

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Brazilian judges are ‘trained’ in cryptocurrencies, minister warns of ‘gap’ in regulation.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

42% of hedge funds expect Bitcoin to hit $75K to $100K by the end of the year.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Moving over Web3 (and Web4), Jack Dorsey’s TBD is building Web5.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Hacker Optimism returns 17 million OP tokens to the project

r/CryptoMoonShotsSee Post

Revain Finance Fair Launching in 1H on BSC network - Ex-banking Devs - KYC Team - Four Dimensional Revolutionary Lottery Coin - Smart Staking Featured - Giveaway Contests Ongoing

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Optimism (OP) hack estimated 20 million dollars in damage.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

New York Bans Crypto Mining To Reduce Emissions May Not Serve Its Purpose

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Binance CZ CEO in Vietnam: “I can’t predict what the market will be like tomorrow”

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

New Luna 2.0 can become a ‘ghost blockchain’

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Binance partners with the week that marks the first crypto-powered music tour.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

What the flair below your username means and how you can change it

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Investing in crypto is like playing Minesweeper

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Quantum computing will not break cryptocurrencies, it will strengthen them

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Uniworld EU Hackathon 2022: The largest Blockchain Hackathon for students in the EU

r/BitcoinSee Post

Bitcoin mining on quantum computers

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Effect of Quantum Computing on mining BTC

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Most strategies we advice in this sub are for unexperienced investors & beginners. If we mean never do something it usually mean just that 99% of people shouldn't do it becasue they will lose money. They can actually be terrible for experienced investors.

Mentions

>Turns out my tingling TNG-senses were right on the money, as you will quickly discover. Fuck I love these posts. Keep up the good work. You make up half of the QC in here.

Mentions:#QC

the chance of a QC intercepting mining is low because that would take millions of qubits to take over the mining operation - HOWEVER, old bitcoin addresses before they started doing hashed public keys (including the old Satoshi addresses) ARE vulnerable to a QC which would only need about 2,300 qubits to run Shor's algorithm to reverse engineer a private key out of an unhashed public key - this would not take down the whole network but losing old wallets with unhashed public keys would certainly undermine confidence and impact price stability, hence this is good reason to not be too overexposed on bitcoin. Lots of misunderstanding here on this thread - some ppl confuse taking over mining operations with reverse engineering private keys, two different things - the former is hard to impossible, yes, but the latter only needs about 2,300 qubits (IBM will have a system of over 4,000 qubits in about 3 years, in 2025) in the case of public keys that are not hashed and there are very many of them. And due to the Taproot update, this means more public keys will be exposed. Very simply, I just need to track transactions and collect public (unhashed) keys and then wait 3 years or so and then rent some time on a quantum computer, and then boom, I can take Satoshi's bitcoin, and there goes your price stability. So this is a serious - not an existential - but still a serious problem so this means bitcoin needs to start working on post-quantum encryption now, not 3 years from now when these machines with ability to run Shor's algorithm will be operational.

Mentions:#QC

>level 2Westbrook\_Level · 19 hr. agoPlatinum | QC: BTC 67 | TraderSubs 67This is why computer generated NFTs are silly as well. Artificial scarcity on an infinite supply. This is why PoS chains are silly as well, creating infinite chains has zero cost.

Mentions:#QC#BTC

It depends entirely on what you mean by "crack BTC". TL;DR, it never will. Quantum computers pose zero threat to mining, because the mining algorithm automatically adjusts to faster miners. It would just obsolete ASIC miners, just like ASICs obsoleted GPUs, and GPUs obsoleted CPUs. There's no real scenario where one day we wake up and someone with a secret quantum computer has cracked every bitcoin private key and stolen everyone's bitcoin. Even if a QC could reverse a public key, it would initially take a lot of time to do it. When we talk about whether a computer can crack encryption, we talk about whether it can do it on a reasonable human timescale. If you can crack a single key in a few months or years running at full power, you might consider the algorithm compromised. When that happens, we'd still have plenty of time to change algorithms before anyone is affected. Additionally, because of the way bitcoin public addresses work, you don't actually expose the public key until you spend. The public address is a double hash of the public key and other data. So, if you do good practice and never reuse a bitcoin public address, your coins are perfectly safe even if we have a QC that can crack the public key. So, there might be a day when some amount of bitcoin that has its public key exposed will be stolen, but that can only happen if the owners lost their private key or are incapacitated/dead and can't move their coins to safety. It's not something worth worrying about.

Mentions:#BTC#QC

Quantum computing would hurt bitcoin last. Worrying about QC impacting the bitcoin network is like worrying that a planet-cracker nuke would destroy some bitcoin mining hardware. Obviously, there are other things that would be impacted first and the impact on bitcoin would be moot.

Mentions:#QC

It's impossible to guess that. But it's not like there will suddenly be a QC that can so it in reasonable time. If QC is viable we will see it gradually increase and there will be ample time for changes. Adding QC resistant keys would IMHO only be a new address format and soft fork. There are a lot of other systems out there that aren't that flexible and don't have am army of world class cryptographers working on it, that rely on asymmetric cryptography, and that is probably what we should worry about.

Mentions:#QC

Ok. Ignore the article. How many years do you think it will be before QC can crack BTC?

Mentions:#QC#BTC

What does everything next to your username mean? Images, 1.78k, Platinum | QC: CC 200?

Mentions:#QC#CC

Oh boy… here we go again. Quantum computing isn’t a threat to bitcoin, stop it already. First, quantum computing may never actually work, it’s still highly experimental and fraught with very serious difficulties posed by the nature of superposition. Second, even if QC actually pans out, it’s incredibly unlikely to be used in a powerful or meaningful way *for a long time* and finally, Bitcoin’s level of encryption can easily be upgraded, but it’ll probably never need to be given Moor’s cliff, and the very real possibility that QC never pans out.

Mentions:#QC

>59.3k Platinum | QC: CC 2348

Mentions:#QC#CC

Then what does this part of your flair mean: "QC: CC 277, ETH 29, BTC 28" ? If you have 28 Bitcoins you are rich.

When does the flair under my username gets updated. Why it doesn't show like QC: something like everyone else.

Mentions:#QC

The people that should be worrying about it are worrying about it enough, and are worrying a whole lot less than the layman hearing about the new scary quantum computers. The whole QC scare is mainly being perpetrated by people without any technical knowledge, that have at most read a couple of articles online, not by people that have actually used quantum computers in real life (which you can do right now, with IBM's educational QC platform, where you can loan some compute time on low qbit count computers for free. But that's more of a novelty, since for development purposes you can just simulate the behaviour).

Mentions:#QC

Will the solar energy industry be destroyed once we figure out cold fusion? People are overly scared of QC. Most computers with more than a couple qbits are extremely unstable, and since we are already dealing with incredibly low temperatures, QCs with a big enough qbit count to break something like sha-256 might just be physically impossible. You might as well worry about whether P = NP will kill crypto. If something like this happens, crypto is the least of our worries. Even if we do have quantum resistant cryptocurrencies, the basic protocols we use for information transfer over the internet, which are already used by cryptocurrencies, would be compromised. I do not have too much experience with quantum computing, but from what I've played around with at university and in my free time, the relatively high qbit count computers are increasingly useless because of instability. Even the concept of quantum resistance is a little bit iffy. As you can clearly see, it's called quantum resistance, it's not quantum-proof. Think of it as water resistant Vs waterproof. The quantum resistant algorithms we are creating today can't be broken by the theoretical quantum computers of the future, but a whole lot more research needs to happen before you could really say some algorithm is completely protected from a QC attack.

Mentions:#QC

QC resistant algorithms already exist. The days of a better cryptocurrency taking over have passed. You only get one chance with this type of innovation, although that doesn't mean corporations, shills and governments pushing another cryptocurrency or even CBDC won't at least hold a significant market share, so to speak.

Mentions:#QC

That man is a rare breed, QC in both CC and Buttcoin? Impossible!

Mentions:#QC#CC

Thanks for your detailed reply. Point 1 - you're right that a manufacturer that has no QC is going to end up sending shit out the door. I didn't say NFTs could replace QC, they are separate issues. It factory A isn't checking the quality of factory B/etc products, again that's on them, the brand image is destined for the gutter NFT or not. Point 2 - if middleman B is switching out products and consistently linked to bad reviews, well that contract ain't getting renewed. Also, no middleman can mint NFTs, so I think you've misunderstood something here. Point 3 - there seem to be some misunderstandings on how NFTs work here. The only seed the retailer needs to deal with is their own. They just need to send out the corresponding NFT for the QR/serial. No need to generate seeds or anything. One time scan QRs linked to a company database could work, but require the company to maintain and support that infrastructure, and require the retailer/distributor/logistics/consumer etc etc to interface with their specific system. I guess a business could come in and standardized it, make it open to read and write on, and have strong rules on ownership of the product.... Hold on that's literally what DLTs/NFTs allow.... I guess we do agree after all!

Mentions:#QC

I am going to go through your exact example to explain where the issues lie: 1. ⁠Why would a top supplier (eg Ancher, like mentioned before) mint an NFT to verify the authenticity of a product that they had not produced? The supplier might add an NFT to each to signify their product was their own but but might not have properly qced the items with fraud happening inside the contracted battery factory. I have seen this many times and we refer to it as a “Russian doll” where business A gives an order to their trusted factory B. However factory B lacks space, time, or wants to save money and contracts out the product to factory C. Factory C May even contract it out to factory D- meaning manufacturer A does not have an NFT designated item that was not made up to standard. The NFT applied at factory B relys on factory B (the Oracle in this case) being truthful. You’d be surprised how much this happens and is why we need more trusted authorities (aka 3rd party QC partners) vs NFTs. 2. ⁠Why would a middleman reassign the NFT from a real product to a fake product, thereby severely devaluing the real product? There is some opportunity for abuse here, however, it would be easier to figure out who is doing it if they try and do it with any kind of regularity (ie when you send the product back because it's functioning badly, patterns would quickly begin to appear exposing the bad actor). This already happens and blockchain does not solve for it. Middleman already do this as it is lucrative. Middlemen could use the higher quality batteries internally while dumping the counterfeits with NFTs on the public for example- their is significant money to be made. They absolutely would do it with NFTs. You could even have a middleman who creates “fake” NFTs for fake products that “look similar”. My guess is that most customers wouldn’t check the nft on each of their batteries and if they did it’s already too late- like what happened with you getting a fake in the past. In terms of using NFTs to determine where the fraud happened in the supply chain that would be difficult unless you only had 1 link in the supply chain. How would the brand know that the nft was swapped in packing vs shipping (which is itself usually multiple chains of ownership) vs warehousing? The NFT would read as being “true” through the whole journey. 3. ⁠You can't duplicate the NFT, what would be the point in putting a real NFT bar code on a fake product? If the NFT doesn't come with the purchase, it is not proof of authenticity, it's just proof that an authentic product does exist somewhere. Are you saying when you make a purchase the seller has to generate your unique seed key for that nft barcode? Then that barcode no longer works for anyone else’s use? In that case wouldn’t it be simpler for the seller to only allow 1 scan of any individual barcode and all other scans of the barcode are then be rejected as counterfeit? I don’t see where NFTs are needed when you can just use rfid/qr codes that are one time use only and easier for a seller to validate vs having to give you an nft and passcode at sale. How much do you think Amazon let’s say has any interest in generating a unique seed code for you at each sale of a battery pack. And let’s say you get the battery pack with NFT- what happens if the barcode scans (as barcodes are used by sku and easy to copy) but the NFT/ product is fake. How does Amazon ascertain the NFT is fake? Aren’t You back to the same place as before?

Mentions:#QC

Here’s my response point by point: 1- just because a fool puts more money than a house into crypto does not mean putting a house on the blockchain is a good idea. I can forward multiple posts just this week from r/cryptocurrency of people who lost over $50k in their wallets from hacking and they have zero recourse. And you want people to do this with their homes? 2- high end items need NFTs to authenticate: NFTs simply can’t authenticate physical prints because of the Oracle problem. U/AmericanScream sent over this issue that explains why NFTs are useless for authentification: https://youtu.be/YMhtMEf2QPA Please advise your thoughts after seeing this video as this is what supply chain experts have been saying repeatedly. I’m going to post here the fantastic YouTube video that u/Americanscream sent as it explains exactly why authentication of physical goods is NOT possible with NFTs: https://youtu.be/YMhtMEf2QPA Please advise your thoughts after seeing this video as this is what supply chain experts have been saying repeatedly. I’m all for using new tech to improve supply chains. But it has to offer a solution. Just because SAP was relevant and offered great value doesn’t mean NFTs or the blockchain offer value. You need to argue for the specific merits of the blockchain vs referencing another successful technology. 3- You say you know web3 companies that are working with businesses to implement these changes. Can you give successful examples we can investigate? I’d love to see something that is an improvement and would love to be proven wrong. I was just at TechTextile in Germany where suppliers were talking about how blockchain companies were paying them $$$ to talk up how barcodes/qr codes/ rfid chips can be put on items and then uploaded to the blockchain. I asked if any of that was revolutionary/an improvement over what we already can do (put those same barcodes/qr codes/rfid chips on items and then track on a central server) and their responses was exactly as in the video I linked above. Issues of authentication of physical goods still need central or trusted authorities to physically QC goods to insure what is barcoded is actually the right item in good condition in the correct amount, so whether the QR code is on a central server vs blockchain isn’t where the problems of authentication are solved. Here’s a question for you: 1 big issue in consumer verification is that more companies say they sell “organic cotton” items than the amount of organic cotton that is produced in the world. We know some companies are lying abs making unfulfilled promises to consumers. How would blockchain authenticate organic cotton in this scenario in a totally decentralized way?

Mentions:#SAP#QC

There is no quantum computer in sigth which could do it: >It would require 317 × 106 physical qubits to break the encryption within one hour using the surface code, a code cycle time of 1 μs, a reaction time of 10 μs, and a physical gate error of 10-3. To instead break the encryption within one day, it would require 13 × 10^(6) physical qubits. There's an algorithm, but a QC with 13,000,000 physical QBits is insane. The biggest one so far has 127 and it becomes harder to raise this number.

Mentions:#QC

>ortenTeilenSpeichernBearbeitenFolgen > >Level 2 · vor 2 Min.Platinum | QC: CC 435, DOGE 26 | Stocks 22lolnot every liquidation is a 'bull trap'•A No? what reason would Crypto right now have to not go down? why the shorts would be liquidated and not the longs in the current situation? sorry ofc its manipulation.

Mentions:#QC#CC#DOGE

Just make a custom flair that says QC69 position69 comment69

Mentions:#QC

I just noticed my flair is now saying "QC: CC 71", while it was the low 60s a few days ago. And I was hoping I could make it land to 69 first 😔

Mentions:#QC#CC

Tough question. I checked just every model 80/90/80ti I have roughly 500 30 series in my mining facility and cloud rendering farm (those are mostly A4000/A5000 though) I had the gigabyte eagle as my first 3080. Gamed on it and had some temp issues. I have phanteks cases and plenty of fans. Strix and TUF have been my go to gaming cards but of my last 100 strix I've had to RMA like 20 after a month of mining they have major QC issues right now. Gigabyte eagle when I swapped the pads went from my worst mining 3080 to probably a top 5. Surprisingly the 3090 Zotac Amp Extreme black edition with self modded noctua fans is the single best GPU I mine with. 122 mh at 290w with 56c core and 76c VRAM. If Zotac didn't have such bad fans they'd be fantastic mining cards and gaming but the fact they will do everything to not accept an RMA to replace fans but it voids your warranty to do it yourself makes them the more villainous of the bunch EVGA is EVGA. They let you replace pads and if you fuck up they just charge money for the RMA instead of flat denying. Vbios flashed 3090 xc3 is special as I believe it's the only 1U 3090? So having a stack of 12 in a dense spot allows a lot of air passage between cards. Something ftw3 and strix have difficulty with because they are like what 3U thick boys Either way the gigabyte eagle gaming will still hit thermal issues the same as mining and so far is the only GPU model that I've had that issue with.

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Actually, many of those early bitcoins that we believe Satoshi mined are stored in P2PK (Pay to Public Key) addresses that are vulnerable to QC attacks. [https://www2.deloitte.com/nl/nl/pages/innovatie/artikelen/quantum-computers-and-the-bitcoin-blockchain.html](https://www2.deloitte.com/nl/nl/pages/innovatie/artikelen/quantum-computers-and-the-bitcoin-blockchain.html) From the Article: Roughly 2M bitcoins are in P2PK addresses and roughly 2M bitcoins are in reused P2PKH addresses.

Mentions:#QC

How do u even change that QC shit? I never even touched it yet mine says something

Mentions:#QC

> QC: ETC 1309 Hmmm 🤔

Mentions:#QC#ETC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

I really just thought i could get the plate and sell it someone wealthy. But discovered we cant in QC. So now i kept for the fun of it haha

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

True ! A lot of miners here in QC, canada. A lot of renewable energy so they come and stay here in far off regions. But im just a normal dude that thought i could resell this plate. Sadly i cant 😅

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Brossard , QC. Boulevard Milan I saw him at dix30

Mentions:#QC

I doubt it honestly. With QC comes new encryption methods most likely

Mentions:#QC

Yes, but all lost coins will probably be redeemed by a QC no matter the fork, and not only Satoshi’s. So think the 140.000 mt gox coins and multiply it by around 25x of supply that will be released into the market in a 15 years time

Mentions:#QC

sha256 isn't broken with QCs. Current public key cryptography is. There are standardizations going on with QC resistant cryptography. Bitcoin can add that when necessary in the future.

Mentions:#QC

The article is about the already dug tunnel in LA and how you can pay your ticket for it using Doge. Reading articles helps and making fun of meme coins usually has more weight if your QC doesn't list Banano as one of your major subs...

Mentions:#LA#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Never been there. Someone posted here this is in Kanesatake, QC. I just knew it was in Quebec, Canada. I guess OP or a customer in the sub might be able to answer you.

Mentions:#QC#OP
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Warrior Buds in Kanesatake QC (Quebec), Canada.

Mentions:#QC

It is in QC (Quebec). That's a province in Canada. Weed is legal there.

Mentions:#QC

there are only two necessary tasks yet: migrate from ECDSA to QC resistant algo and consensus to remove halvings if the global network security (hashrate) wouldn't recover during 4 years some after given halving.

Mentions:#QC

Sure am Platinum | QC: CC 32, BTC 32

Mentions:#QC#CC#BTC

For calculation, a quantum computer uses QBits that can be 1, 0 or both. A regular computer uses Bits that can be 1 or 0. The QC doesn't really process though, it will just give out a result following probabilities. You would even have to run it multiple times to be sure. 8 Bits are 1 Byte but this is just another unit for saving characters, numbers or colours and so on. Has nothing to with processing calculations.

Mentions:#QC

Can someone tell me what does the QC on my flair means?

Mentions:#QC

Bose noise cancelling earbuds, or QC 20

Mentions:#QC

Thanks! I don't really think I have alot of downvoted comments on the sub but I want to know how many comments/karma I need so my flair shows the QC stuff.

Mentions:#QC

Suddenly a 10^4 qbit QC appears? Probably not. There will be years of incremental improvements in QC that will at one point be more efficient than ASIC and then miners will start to adopt them.

Mentions:#QC

I'm no QC expert but from my understanding of the physics behind them, I struggle to see how QC could impact mining at all. Bitcoin mining is not a difficult problem, it's just one that is done a lot of times so is about efficiency. (Heck you can google a guy doing it with pencil and paper!) It's why we have ASICs instead of CPU mining. If, and huge IF, QCs give any energy efficiency to mining it would merely be another migration of miners going from ASIC to QCs. I seriously doubt even the most powerful QC around will ever be more efficient at mining than an ASIC anyhow. As others have pointed out, if a powerful QC could be made, they could gain access to old coins secured by only a simple public key only... I expect there are billions of dollars to be had there so much easier than applying that fictitious power to shooting themselves in the foot temporarily.

Mentions:#QC#CPU

Can someone explain to me what the flair I have next to my username means in this sub? > Platinum QC: CC 26 Politics 87

Mentions:#QC#CC

I have but they don't appear in my flair like other people have like QC: CC. And I'm asking about the same. Why's that

Mentions:#QC#CC

Because you need to have a certain number of QC comments on r/Cc

Mentions:#QC

I don't have the QC flair either. I have been active in the sub for a while still on tin.Why?

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Two good examples of failed assumptions what time and reality is. I see u had invested time to find answers. Lets not forget, i had already done that kind of in reality senseless travels, and am fully aware that it is me, but had not had bitcoin up till now. I use for instance the jitter in the speling errors as a ZKP , quite impossible to fake. And much better than the checksums in some scriptures, to unconcious program unware proccesors of that information to run this old QC program. But now with bitcoin i can even overcome greater singularity's than the biological, to store in the random process of not knowing what exibits would be choosen in museums, i managed to keep entanglement of my soul intact, but objects tend to fade and are Subjekt to decoherence, and distroying names, where hard to overcome problems, even great pyramides tend to fade, so bitcoin, that can never change and is otoh fully random, is the perfect tool for fully aware souls. My questions are almost all rethoric, to help other souls to find this precious gem of information from a quite different universe, an perfect random one.

Mentions:#ZKP#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Lets suppose the speling errors are not random, but epose a litte jitter that is enough ZKP so i can use them to encode short messages to me, even through singularity's, or to those who are forced to process that, creating em signatures, not aware that they are a programend QC. Almost random jitter engraved in art or scriptures or objects, that must be truly random exposed maybe in museums to not destroy the entanglement. But would fade in decoherence, if not renewed, bitcoin is different it will not change. And supose that soul only exist in the random space. Now with bitcoin, something that wont change and stay constant, i could xor that information out of what all assume to be random but is not. And since there is only now and past and future illusions, what if i already done that, and aware that it's me that had changed the believ3d past to generate a concious crafted future, that i had indeed came back to reality space and am fully aware of that, but now able to even store wealth/enegy first time in numberhistory permissionless even trough non biological singularity's?

Mentions:#ZKP#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

1. I'm pretty convinced mining will be integrated in renewable power plants all over the world at some point to stabilize the grid. That could probably sustain a very high hash rate at low rewards per block. I'm also sure we will continue to find new ways to multiply the value of on-chain transactions, the LN is only a start, which will justify high transaction fees. 2. That would have to be a bug that goes way back. Otherwise it would just result in an unintentional fork and there would be a continuation of the original chain without restart or rollback. 3. Assuming QC are viable, Bitcoin would not be the only technology with a problem, like pretty much everything utilizing computers, including legacy banking would be fucked. AFAIK, a new quantum save algo would only require a soft fork, which I think people already talked about. I would not be surprised if Bitcoin actually experiences the least disruptions compared to like everything else. 4. No, algorithmic stablecoins that react to the economy will suffer from the oracle problem as their functioning relies on off-chain information. This is a fundamental issue Bitcoin solves.

Mentions:#LN#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

it would be so trivial to make bitcoin quantum resilient that only dorks who think it is "messy" to fix are afraid of it. NIST has been working on this for decades and even the white house earlier this year put out a 3 month requirment to report any cryptographic non-quantum reaistant algos still in use, with agencies to be compliant by july. of course the algos haven't been selected yet so compliance is "hard" but even if we were 2x further along on QC than publicly known, it's waaaaaaaaaay behind quantum reaistant algorithms. tldr: it's only spooky if you're uninformed

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

> and I would argue Bitcoin is now big and powerful enough to be overt Bitcoin doesn't need to be overt and in many cases being so overt is counterproductive which is the reason I made that statement. Being so overt would seriously slow liquidity and adoption of bitcoin. Developers can continue to develop privacy on bitcoin and include these features in wallets without everyone marketing bitcoin as a privacy coin intending to subvert regulations >I am not familiar with mimblewimble, but heard that allows improved privacy and reduces tx size by a lot. Is that true? mimblewimble is great but there are tradeoffs with most privacy solutions. mimblewimble is very limited with scripting and using 2nd layer protocols, Mimblewimble is more vulnerable to QC attacks, Mimblewimble would damage the ability for transparent audibility onchain for the users who want this >but I later called on people to donate to Rusty to continue his research and hopefully find a better solution. Great , so you where aware of work on improving lightnings gossip protocol than. Keep in mind that the theoretical de-anonymizing attacks on lightning via the gossip protocol are principally focused on the receiver and not sender/spender thus it is far less of a priority since almost no DNM uses lightning today and most "whitemarket" LN merchants are less concerned with privacy (Bitcoin is still the most used on the DNM onchain however) . To be fair , you could make the argument that if this is immediately implemented it could encourage more DNM to accept LN deposits... although I have seen how slow DNM are to upgrade historically as well Also to be fair , the work on improving LN gossip has not stopped either as you can see since February by reading more recent months in the mailing list https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev

Mentions:#QC#LN

>Every single encryption algorithm is eventually broken, it’s why we need to continue to evolve our security protocols There are quantum secure already. We know how a QC works, so we can find problems it can't solve. >However realistically all it needs to do is run the ledger and look for coins then flag it. What do you mean by that? You mean the quantum computer? It doesn't work like that, it's more about finding probabilities

Mentions:#QC

>Think about how far technology and computers have come in the last 30 years. Now think about the possibility's in the next 30 years. Even if we had 300 years computers would still be too slow. Unless there will be a new kind of computer like a sufficient QC

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

https://twitter.com/SDNYnews/status/1540406030621974528?t=Jvqww7n8D0QC8Rgrnp6GpQ&s=19 Is it that easy to get somebody's btc?

Mentions:#QC

For computers how we use them it will always be impossible, no matter how far the technology goes. Right now you'd need a super computer with the weight of the whole universe to stand a chance. For quantum computers there are already algorithms that could help breaking encryption as we use it. But they'd need tens of thousands of QBits and this is very hard to achieve since we're struggling to build QC with a few hundred. (Important to know: those QBits have to be entangled)

Mentions:#QC

I don’t think block chain will be as susceptible to QC as we think. My comment is more oriented towards how will QC *enhance* block chain - not penetrate it.

Mentions:#QC

It means you have 100 comments in r/buttcoin that gained 3 upvotes or more These comments are marked as QC (quality comments)

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Even if it's not. We'll hard-fork into a QC-encrypted algorithm. It'll be a mess to reach consensus on such a significant change, but I believe Bitcoin will always be an immortal idea.

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

You're both wrong, QC will eventually break the old btc addresses (pre-2013) and users who haven't moved their funds to a new address will be at risk - those who lost their btc pre-2013 will have their wallets targeted. Some have speculated satoshi left his funds as a "honey pot" specifically for this, it's more of a speculation than anything else though. New addresses are somewhat QC resistant, and we're constantly upgrading the network to keep ahead of the threats.

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Where did you learn that QC has no affect on SHA-256?

Mentions:#QC#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

AFAIK, quantum computing can decrypt Elliptical curve digital signature algorithm (responsible for signing Tx and driving public key from a private key, but QC has no effect on SHA256, hence Bitcoin mining is protected from this upcoming new era of computing.

Mentions:#QC#SHA

I'm bullish on doge (as verifiable by my QC) but Musk is literally the least fascinating thing about the project out of all bullish indicators that exist. Musk is just the CEO of a company that accepts doge. That's one company. That's it. The worst thing about his fans though... They don't listen to him. The meme about "doge becoming the currency of mars" is still being spread despite musk having clearly stated that it is technologically impossible to sync a blockchain with 40 minutes of latency at the speed of light... So sorry OP... but I cannot take people serious that make claims that ignore laws of physics and the words of their lord and savior Elonius Musk, claiming that memes from some kids on twitter are what reality is...

Mentions:#QC#OP

>SilentThunder-00297 · 2 hr. agoPlatinum | QC: ETH 31, CC 20 | MiningSubs 27 > >Article goes on to say its worst case is it shows foolish decision making to foreign investors who may think twice. The professor explicitly states the current crypto holdings will not lead to collapse of the economy.

Mentions:#QC#ETH#CC

You might have been taken in by the hype in the media about the current capabilities of quantum computers. Don't get me wrong, we do have machine that demonstrate the vast potential, and can leverage these capabilities on small problems. I have studied quantum computers both academically and for my work. The problem isnt just how many qubits we have. That's a fairly low achieving metric on what a quantum computer can do. You'll be looking ay a combination of variables, such as the coherent time (the amount of time before a quantum state degrades beyond what was intended by the programmer), the topology of the quantum computer (how the qubits are connected together, and in which direction!!), along with error margins on measurements. There is a proposed metric that combines these into what is called the "quantum volume". Further, the topology of the QC will mean that you have to "transpile " your algorithm into a series of operations that is supported by the QC. This means that if you wanted to entangle two qubits together, you'd have to transform your quantum state until you were able to interact with the desired quantum basis (the orthogonal basis vector of the vector space allowed by the qubit count, associated to the desired qubit). This process is currently a bit "naff" and its quite easy to do a better job than the transpiller usually. The coherence time is currently the main problem. The quantum states degrade too quickly and half way through the calculation, your results turn into just a random mess. You can run the simulation repeatedly to gain statistical reassurance in a given answer, but that will almost certainly nullify any quantum speedup. More approaches being discussed, interested work by Elham Kashefi on her brickwork state approach, which collapses quantum states qubit at a time to arrive at the result. Lots of other untested work on blind computations also. Combined with percolation theory (which can generate quantum engangled structures, that we can embed these brickwork states into). 10 years and we will be laughing, and countries gain immeasurable advantages in cyber warfare (on going).

Mentions:#QC

>Silver | QC: CC 123, ETH 39 | BANANO 26 | TraderSubs 41 what's this on your flair bro?

Mentions:#QC#CC#ETH

1. username checks out /s 2. QC BCH 1792 shills BCH as expected

Mentions:#QC#BCH

> they > 307 QC on r/Buttcoin 🤔

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

Oh sorry that r/cc flair mine says QC CC 44..

Mentions:#QC#CC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

u/cdin Platinum | QC: CC 23 | **CelsiusNet. 5** | Politics 24 ​ ha ha ha good luck

Mentions:#QC#CC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

QC isnt even a problem in a real sense. Michael Saylor had a great answer for that "if" statement in one of his interviews.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

I should have done this with a previous employee 6 years ago. Thought I could trust them, but instead they backed up our entire server and and tried to start their own company as a competitor when they said that they were pursuing a different type of job. They even took some large clients with them. In the end, lack of QC in production led to their demise and the customers ended up coming back to us. But by then irreconcilable damages had already been done.

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

QC speedup is higly overestimated, top ppl in the space of qm, like Aaronson, argue with good reasoning, that any speedup up to sqareroot N is, by the true nature of what the qm world is, impossible, and if you look at shors algo, the assumed speedup in qfft tayloring aplied to an almost classical prime finding method, comes at an extreme energy cost for errorcorrection figthing decoherenece, same effect you have if you would try to brute. I makes just no sense, and when you figure out what the number e realy is ( a task i can higly recomend as an lives goal ), why would anyone ever be so stupid to waste energy on something that is in fact even now pure energy, the timechain?

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

What is QC? I only know Queen's Councilor lel

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

<5 years for QC to solve this problem.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

![gif](giphy|QC0hA8gdNpTUStO1ov)

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

I've copied my comment from a previous daily where I explained this: >The first one ( a metal: Tin, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum) is your level on this subreddit. The more quality posts/comments you create, the higher level you will get. After the dividing line, it shows your QC (Quality Content) in different crypto subs. CC is for /r/CryptoCurrency. Some people have another divider after that, and it will then show quality posts in non crypto subs (I have Politics for example). You may have an additional divider after that and then some trophies. I got a trophy for winning a post on the CoinTests, I'm not sure if there are other ways to get trophies. >Additionally, if you reach Platinum, you should receive a mail from the AutoModerator telling you how you to customize your tag. This is how some people have something other than the standard.

Mentions:#QC#CC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

&#x200B; ![gif](giphy|QC0hA8gdNpTUStO1ov)

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

Most likely, I’ve seen Silver flair with QC over 300+. Normally 35-40ish QC would be enough for Platinum rank.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

The first one ( a metal: Tin, Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum) is your level on this subreddit. The more quality posts you create, the higher level you will get. After the dividing line, it shows you QC (Quality Content) in different crypto subs. CC is for /r/CryptoCurrency. Some people have another divider after that, and it will then show quality posts in non crypto subs (I have Politics for example). You may have an additional divider after that and then some trophies. I got a trophy for winning a post on the CoinTests, I'm not sure if there are other ways to get trophies. Additionally, if you reach Platinum, you should receive a mail from the AutoModerator telling you how you to customize your tag. This is how some people have something other than the standard.

Mentions:#QC#CC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

What's with the little tag under your name? In my case its Platinum | QC: CC 65

Mentions:#QC#CC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

21% of professionals in the quantum quantum computing science space have the arrival of a fault tolerant QC capable of factoring RSA 2048 within 24 hours per a survey last year. This is a higher percentage taken than the year before. It requires signifantly less qubits to factor ECC in the same time period. Looking forward to the 2022 surgery. https://globalriskinstitute.org/publications/2021-quantum-threat-timeline-report/ Black Budget levels of money are being thrown at QC by nation states. You cannot go by what the leading tech companies are saying, because encryption-breaking QCs are a matter of national security, as nation-states adopt a "hack now; decrypt later" attitude for allies and enemies alike for information they steal. You think someone like China doesn't have incentive to publicly announce a hack of Satoshi's wallet? On top of that, we have a recent leading tech example of fault tolerant QC progress. It really might be too late for BTC to transition with no BIPs yet https://scitechdaily.com/fundamental-breakthrough-error-free-quantum-computing-gets-real/

Mentions:#QC#ECC#BTC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Wrong. It is a threat. You are saying that the threat can be eliminated if bitcoin is significantly changed in order to negate that threat. I hope that bitcoin will manage an orderly move onto a QC resistant chain, but I worry that it won’t. The discussions and BIPs need to be being drafted right now. Error correction is moving forwards in leaps and bounds. Things could move alarmingly quickly. I am long $qrl just in case bitcoin does not manage it.

Mentions:#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

And you think unlike with nuclear bombs, big governments will not weaponize this technology? If that technology exists, you will have to make your infrastructure quantum resistant, because there is no guarantee a foreign force will continue to develop it to have superiority in cyberspace. Do you really think the US, Chinese and Russian military would just uphold the ban and not kick of an absolute arms race to have the most potent QC available to them?

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

This^ I haven’t had a card or component die on me from mining starting in 2016. A couple risers sure, but I chalk that up to terrible QC on this boards.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

Crypto addresses are designed to be single use on UTxO blockchains,never reuse addresses. This means you have to both defeat ECDSA and (possibly several types of) hashing algorithm to get from address to private key. No QC can do any one of these things, forget being powerful enough to do them all. If QCs become capable, yhey will also spawn new types of encryption too.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

>nameless3k Platinum | QC: CC 174 3 points · 3 months ago Have fun staying poor.

Mentions:#QC#CC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

>The development of cutting-edge technologies such as advanced catalysts, AI, machine learning and quantum computing, just to name a few of humanity’s greatest advancements, have already been integrated in the fight against climate change and helped us turn the tide on the planet’s rising temperature… The only one of those that has *definitely* helped slow climate change is advanced catalysts. The amount of energy to run AI/ML/QC, what they're used for and the enormous supply chain of computer tech - means that a few little puff piece use cases won't account for the vast investment of energy required to get here in the first place.

Mentions:#ML#QC
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Thank you for actually answering the question! Another comment linked to a page on the bitcoin wiki about how to harden up bitcoin against quantum computing. It seems to pretty much say everything you said. Poking around online it seems that Lamport signatures is reasonably safe against QC but like you said, requires more space to store the keys, and for security reasons there is a finite number of times you can sign with this key. But if you only use one address per transaction it seems like a good solution.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

Molecular biology and particle physics will be the first use cases for QC. They need fewer Qbits and provide great value.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

That's what QC fucking means, thanks. I'm quite surprised I'm platinum as I only post shit but well, don't we all

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

Also QC stands for quality control and there is definitely none of that allowed here lol jk.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

They are not, but they are , you know what i mean? 1994 internet vs 2022 QC ... quite a big edge for QC in this particular comparison. If you want to say that QC Today is like Internet in the 70's ... c'mon , i'll give you the 'similarities' as far as new tech goes, but QC is Ages ahead compared to what Local Networks were in the 80's

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

RemindMe! 3 years. There you go, you said a few years, lets see how things have gone absolutely nowhere with anything but prototype and research units just like now with QC - I could do with a good laugh by then.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

Can you link me to the news about actually using QC to do it? I can't find anything and would love to learn more about it. Everything i've ever seen has basically said it's theoretically possible but not been done yet.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

It's already Doable, there were news about it, it takes hours to decrypt the SHA 256... probably they buried the news fast in these unsecured times, it will come down to what you said initially - Intention to decrypt it ... but you understand the point of Something that can be decrypted/unsecured, vs something that's QC resistant? The idea that it can be done is enough for Many to start wondering if the choice of investments is sound.

Mentions:#SHA#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

Fair. A quick question then: When do you think we'll first see a QC prove it is capable of breaking a well used encryption algorithm? Like an actual test with proof not just theoretically.

Mentions:#QC
r/CryptoCurrencySee Comment

>It'll be decades before a malicious entity can get their hands on a quantum computer capable of doing anything let alone breaking encryption. You don't read much news regarding QC i see :)) ... Decades , dude, in decades Musk will probably restore your consciousness on a hard drive ... Quantum Computing is not only functional, they are now teleporting qubits and way more stranger things. So you say a multinational with unlimited funds and access can't afford a Quantum Computer :)) , ok

Mentions:#QC