Quantum resilience is a clear priority for Ethereum, Solana and other decentralized networks. Quantum computing has become a threat to cryptographic security. The long-term security of Bitcoin has returned to the center of the debate following recent statements by Nic Carter, co-founder of the analysis firm Coin Metrics and ecosystem researcher. Carter has expressed concern about the slowness and lack of urgency on the part of the digital currency protocol developers. to confront the risks of quantum computing.
The specialist pointed out that Quantum resilience “is a clear priority for networks like Ethereum and Solana”. This, in contrast to the prevailing attitude in the Bitcoin technical environment. Likewise, he sharply questioned the perception of security that emanates from Bitcoin programmers. In his words, it is implausible that the protocol developers «continue to pretend that ‘no technical person’ is concerned about the advancement» of quantum. This last one, which has the theoretical potential to breach cryptographic algorithms current. Carter’s analysis points to a governance and culture problem within the development of Bitcoin technology. “It’s funny that the predictable answer to this is ‘it doesn’t matter what altcoin developers do,’” the researcher said. Carter compared the rhetoric of certain sectors of the ecosystem to a closed dogma. He suggested that there is a belief that, as Bitcoin developers They are considered a «moral and technical barometer»«, his apparent inaction must necessarily be interpreted as a fair and correct decision.
Carter questioned the lack of urgency from Bitcoin programmers. Source: @nic_carter – X.
Quantum computing is an engineering challenge
The debate on quantum computing ceased to be a theoretical concern for become an engineering challenge within the digital asset ecosystem.
Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, has previously warned that for a network to function without constant human interventions, it must be inherently resistant to this technology. Consequently, the Ethereum Foundation has funded research to adapt digital signatures that do not depend on elliptic curve cryptography, which is vulnerable to quantum algorithms, as BitcoinDynamic has reported. In the case of Bitcoin, the approach has been noticeably more conservative. Although in January 2026 the launch of a testnet to evaluate protection mechanisms without affecting the main network was reported, the proposed solutions face significant technical obstacles. For example, in 2025, Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, suggested the use of hash function-based signatures like SLH-DSA. However, subsequent analysis showed that these signatures are too heavy for the Bitcoin block, with sizes between 7 and 8 kilobytes, which would drastically increase the cost of transactions.
This technical complexity reinforces the position of those who advocate slow and proven development. But for critics like Carter, the lack of explicit planning puts the main digital currency in a vulnerable position against competitors. Among them, those who They are already structuring profound changes for a post-quantum future.
