Satoshi's collaborator dispels concerns: the quantum end of Bitcoin is an exaggeration

The last panic attack surrounding the threat posed by quantum computers passes almost as quickly as it began. [Adam Back]( — one of the collaborators behind the Bitcoin protocol — definitively dismissed alarmist forecasts suggesting that the [BTC]( valuation should have already dropped by about 30% due to an imminent technological breakthrough.

Where did this panic come from?

The disaster scenario originates from [Charles Edwards]( a well-known analyst who claims that quantum machines will break Bitcoin security within just three years. His thesis is based on research by experts, official schedules, and the assumption that elliptic cryptographic systems will suddenly fail before 2028 — without any preparations or time to respond. Therefore, the market should already be pricing in this catastrophe.

Back says: it’s nonsense

The Bitcoin collaborator’s response leaves no room for doubt. His position is based on concrete facts: [Bitcoin]( does not operate according to the security principles of traditional banks. Instead of classical encryption, the network relies on digital signatures, and quantum-resistant solutions are already available on the market. The NIST institute approved SLH-DSA in 2024 — an algorithm that Bitcoin can adopt without blocking user funds or requiring a complete overhaul of the protocol architecture.

Nonsense.

— Adam Back (@adam3us) [December 17, 2025](

Back emphasizes that transitioning to a new signature standard is a matter of natural software evolution, not an apocalyptic “all or nothing” event. The Taproot upgrade, planned script modifications, and flexible signature rules already facilitate a gradual migration to more secure solutions — long before any real threat appears.

A matter of time, not an apocalypse

The fundamental message that Bitcoin’s collaborator conveys: even in the most optimistic scenarios, it will take years before large, reliable quantum computers appear. When that happens, banks, government institutions, and the global internet infrastructure will be at risk — not only the holders of [Bitcoin](.

The issue is not ignoring research on quantum technology — Back does not deny its importance. It’s about artificially fueled market panic. Bitcoin has time, tools, and a proven history of cryptographic adaptation. If someone treats the theoretical hardware perspective as a pretext for a sudden asset devaluation, they are merely focusing on short-term speculation rather than the actual technical challenges of the protocol itself.