Is there any field with as big of gap between theory and experiment than QC? You read papers like this and think they will be harvesting all Satoshi's coins in a couple years and then you remember that nobody has even factored 21 yet on a real quantum computer.

Here's an interesting discussion from Section 8 - Dormant Wallets:

If a nation state develops a sufficiently powerful quantum computer. Seizure of the Satoshi-era bitcoin wallets without post quantum protections would fund either rogue actors or nation states.

> Indeed, some governments will have the option of using CRQCs (or paying a bounty to companies) to acquire these assets (possibly to burn them by sending them to the unspendable OP RETURN address [321]) as a national security matter. As before, blockchain’s loss of the ability to reliably identify asset owners combined with the laches doctrine [319] enables governments to argue that the original owners, through years of inaction, have failed to assert their property rights

Somewhat ironic that they used ZK proofs to demonstrate they can break Bitcoin's security — while keeping the actual method secret.

Will be pretty wild when mass migration of accounts begin.

The analytics of thousands of accounts sending tokens to new accounts. Better use a VPN a migrate on an unusual hour in your time zone :D

Dup? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47582418

I can't think of a less useful avenue of research in cryptography right now.

'Code is law' doesn't exclude quantum code.

Call me when they have broken ECC with a real quantum computer.