DeFi Trading Room

@danheld At this point it is definitely still a question of _if_ not _when_. We'll know more when we get into the realm of 1000's qubits, and there'll still be plenty of time to act. phys.org/news/2026-03-q…

Regarding the Quantum threat to Bitcoin: It's not a question of if, it's a question of when. And if when is being pulled closer by best estimates, then it's common sense to start discussing solutions. That's not FUD or hysterics, it's just basic game theory.

@drakefjustin The fact is, noone knows if quantum advantage will scale to even 1000 qubits. See e.g. phys.org/news/2026-03-q…

Today is a monumentous day for quantum computing and cryptography. Two breakthrough papers just landed (links in next tweet). Both papers improve Shor's algorithm, infamous for cracking RSA and elliptic curve cryptography. The two results compound, optimising separate layers of the quantum stack. The results are shocking. I expect a narrative shift and a further R&D boost toward post-quantum cryptography. The first paper is by Google Quantum AI. They tackle the (logical) Shor algorithm, tailoring it to crack Bitcoin and Ethereum signatures. The algorithm runs on ~1K logical qubits for the 256-bit elliptic curve secp256k1. Due to the low circuit depth, a fast superconducting computer would recover private keys in minutes. I'm grateful to have joined as a late paper co-author, in large part for the chance to interact with experts and the alpha gleaned from internal discussions. The second paper is by a stealthy startup called Oratomic, with ex-Google and prominent Caltech faculty. Their starting point is Google's improvements to the logical quantum circuit. They then apply improvements at the physical layer, with tricks specific to neutral atom quantum computers. The result estimates that 26,000 atomic qubits are sufficient to break 256-bit elliptic curve signatures. This would be roughly a 40x improvement in physical qubit count over previous state-of-the-art. On the flip side, a single Shor run would take ~10 days due to the relatively slow speed of neutral atoms. Below are my key takeaways. As a disclaimer, I am not a quantum expert. Time is needed for the results to be properly vetted. Based on my interactions with the team, I have faith the Google Quantum AI results are conservative. The Oratomic paper is much harder for me to assess, especially because of the use of more exotic qLDPC codes. I will take it with a grain of salt until the dust settles. → q-day: My confidence in q-day by 2032 has shot up significantly. IMO there's at least a 10% chance that by 2032 a quantum computer recovers a secp256k1 ECDSA private key from an exposed public key. While a cryptographically-relevant quantum computer (CRQC) before 2030 still feels unlikely, now is undoubtedly the time to start preparing. → censorship: The Google paper uses a zero-knowledge (ZK) proof to demonstrate the algorithm's existence without leaking actual optimisations. From now on, assume state-of-the-art algorithms will be censored. There may be self-censorship for moral or commercial reasons, or because of government pressure. A blackout in academic publications would be a tell-tale sign. → cracking time: A superconducting quantum computer, the type Google is building, could crack keys in minutes. This is because the optimised quantum circuit is just 100M Toffoli gates, which is surprisingly shallow. (Toffoli gates are hard because they require production of so-called "magic states".) Toffoli gates would consume ~10 microseconds on a superconducting platform, totalling ~1,000 sec of Shor runtime. → latency optimisations: Two latency optimisations bring key cracking time to single-digit minutes. The first parallelises computation across quantum devices. The second involves feeding the pubkey to the quantum computer mid-flight, after a generic setup phase. → fast- and slow-clock: At first approximation there are two families of quantum computers. The fast-clock flavour, which includes superconducting and photonic architectures, runs at roughly 100 kHz. The slow-clock flavour, which includes trapped ion and neutral atom architectures, runs roughly 1,000x slower (~100 Hz, or ~1 week to crack a single key). → qubit count: The size-optimised variant of the algorithm runs on 1,200 logical qubits. On a superconducting computer with surface code error correction that's roughly 500K physical qubits, a 400:1 physical-to-logical ratio. The surface code is conservative, assuming only four-way nearest-neighbour grid connectivity. It was demonstrated last year by Google on a real quantum computer. → future gains: Low-hanging fruit is still being picked, with at least one of the Google optimisations resulting from a surprisingly simple observation. Interestingly, AI was not (yet!) tasked to find optimisations. This was also the first time authors such as Craig Gidney attacked elliptic curves (as opposed to RSA). Shor logical qubit count could plausibly go under 1K soonish. → error correction: The physical-to-logical ratio for superconducting computers could go under 100:1. For superconducting computers that would be mean ~100K physical qubits for a CRQC, two orders of magnitude away from state of the art. Neutral atoms quantum computers are amenable to error correcting codes other than the surface code. While much slower to run, they can bring down the physical to logical qubit ratio closer to 10:1. → Bitcoin PoW: Commercially-viable Bitcoin PoW via Grover's algorithm is not happening any time soon. We're talking decades, possibly centuries away. This observation should help focus the discussion on ECDSA and Schnorr. (Side note: as unofficial Bitcoin security researcher, I still believe Bitcoin PoW is cooked due to the dwindling security budget.) → team quality: The folks at Google Quantum AI are the real deal. Craig Gidney (@CraigGidney) is arguably the world's top quantum circuit optimisooor. Just last year he squeezed 10x out of Shor for RSA, bringing the physical qubit count down from 10M to 1M. Special thanks to the Google team for patiently answering all my newb questions with detailed, fact-based answers. I was expecting some hype, but found none.

@chooserich It is highly speculative that quantum advantage will scale to the number of qubits needed to do anything useful. See e.g. phys.org/news/2026-03-q…

A quantum researcher I was speaking to in DC was telling me we are only a couple years away from Quantum Computing cracking Bitcoin Google posted today that they agree. This is terrifying for Bitcoin and crypto investors.

@JacobKinge It is highly speculative that quantum advantage will scale to even 1000 qubits, let alone 500k. See e.g. phys.org/news/2026-03-q… I think it's a bit early to panic.

Google Quantum AI released a white paper today warning that cracking 256-bit ECC, which is widely used in Bitcoin wallets, requires MUCH fewer resources than originally expected. With under 500,000 physical qubits, any private key could theoretically be cracked in under 9 minutes. Wow. This is one of the many reasons why whales and insiders have been quietly offloading Bitcoin in droves. Bitcoin’s days may be numbered. In a short time, quantum computing can and will completely abolish the space.

@WeR_Toast @AdamBLiv If you take out a collateralized loan at coinbase, the interest just gets added to the balance owed. As long as BTC appreciates by a rate greater than the loan interest rate (currently ~4.4%) you don't need to repay anything. In fact, you can withdraw collateral, or borrow more.

@DeFiTradingRoom @AdamBLiv How are the $400+ monthly interest payments being carried for 10yrs? $48,000?

🔥GENIUS EARLY RETIREMENT LIFE HACK🔥 You can make $750k for FREE with STRK. Don't believe me? Step 1 - Deposit 4.25 BTC ($303k) as collateral at 33% LTV. Get a $100k loan. Liquidation price is ~$35k, meaning BTC would need to drop another 50% from here to get margin called. Step 2 - Buy 1,381 shares of STRK at $72.40. Step 3 - STRK pays 10.5% = $10,500/year in dividends. Your loan costs 10.5% = $10,500/year. Perfect wash. Every dollar of dividend income services the debt. Net carry cost over 10 years: $0. You hold STRK for FREE. Step 4 - BTC goes to $1.6M in ten years (power law). Your 4.25 BTC collateral is now worth $6.85M. The $100k loan is 1.46% of your collateral value. Step 5 - MSTR rides 22.6x BTC growth × 1.33x NAV premium × 1.63x BTC/share accretion = 49x multiplier. MSTR goes from $126 to roughly $6,167. Step 6 - Convert 1,381 STRK into 138.1 MSTR shares. Value: $851,608. Step 7 - Pay off the $100k loan. Net from the STRK play: $751,608. Step 8 - Get your 4.25 BTC back. Worth $6.85M. Final scorecard: $303k turns into $7.6M (25x, 38.0% CAGR). Pure HODL would’ve been $6.85M. The STRK play added $751,608 of free alpha on top at zero net cost. Dividends covered interest. Your BTC never left. It just worked harder.

@cremieuxrecueil It's almost like that other actual insane person, Ignanz Semmelweiss, who was laughed out of the room by the medical establishment of the day for claiming that surgeons not washing their hands were causing childbed fever deaths.

You laugh, but the guy behind the Tylenol-autism claims actually does believe circumcision plays a role in autism. He's an actual insane person who just makes up numbers.

@ViktorBunin @NickADobos Look at the graph again... the dollar has plummeted against most other major currencies. That's not necessarily bad, but it certainly plays a part in BTC's $ appreciation.

@NickADobos Yes, but the same is happening to most other currencies so the dollar is doing fine against them.

Y’all know that bitcoin hitting $120,000 is mainly due to the dollar plummeting, right?

@kylechasse 9%-13% would be a reasonable rate if they didn't shift the LTV risk completely to the borrower.

🚨 JACK MALLERS SAYS STRIKE WILL OFFER SINGLE-DIGIT BITCOIN LOANS. HUGE!!!

@natbrunell @judyshel @judyshel correctly deduces that BTC's finite supply means that BTC has to appreciate in value with a rise in economic output. Yet she prefers gold because at least it "is increasing". Would love to see this further discussed - a lot of economists grapple with this.

I was thrilled to welcome economist @judyshel—monetary scholar, former White House economic advisor and author of Good as Gold—to Coin Stories! We discuss: - Reforming an unaccountable Fed - Her blueprint for gold-backed bonds - The fall of Bretton Woods and its modern implications - Currency imbalances, tariffs, and the future of the U.S. dollar - Bitcoin’s role alongside gold in restoring market integrity Tune in for a nuanced, expert roadmap to fixing today’s monetary system. Timecodes: 00:00 Judy's Origin Story 8:20 US Dollar as Global Reserve Currency 11:54 President Nixon, sound money, and the gold standard 19:43 Revaluing gold, vilifying "sound money" 25:49 Challenging central banks 30:58 Controversial Fed nomination, hearing 39:35 Backing bonds with gold 47:37 Digital currency 58:08 Bitcoin as the neutral reserve asset 1:03:25 Bitcoin as an investment 1:06:10 Open to learning about Bitcoin

@KonradFruhbeck @DocumentingBTC utxo.live/oracle/

@DocumentingBTC That's pretty cool. Where did you get that info from? This should be open source no?

Here's a Bitcoin chart you've never seen before—25,000 blockchain transactions showing price by assuming people usually send even-dollar amounts. No exchanges, just pure onchain data revealing hidden price signals directly from transaction sizes 🤯

@danrgfm @Vivek4real_ Amazon holds over $100B in cash and short term investments. Is that better than holding bitcoin in your opinion?

@Vivek4real_ Amazon shareholders buy stock to own Amazon business, not to own bitcoin. They can buy it themselves if they like it. This is nonsense, never going to happen.

🇺🇸$2.3 TRILLION Amazon just got proposed to assess adding #Bitcoin to it’s Treasury as per shareholders request 🤯 WILD TIMES!

@thetrocro Considering a single person typically has multiple bitcoin addresses, 'SER' and 'NDF' seem like pretty useless measures.

In article form here: btcpolicy.org/articles/is-bi…

If you’re worried about bitcoin’s concentration in a few hands—and it’s a good worry to have—you need to read p. 54-7 of _Resistance Money_ by @resistancemoney, @rettlerb, and @craigwarmke.

@casteliero @AltcoinDailyio If you want to be in the top 1% wealth bracket in the US you need more like $15M...

@AltcoinDailyio So you think it will take 16 years for Bitcoin to go 1 million? Because if you have 1 million, you are allready in 1%

By 2040, having 1 BTC will mean you are top 1%.

@Jamie_ORourke @thepowerfulHRV Can you point me to that "regular 7% savings account" please?

@thepowerfulHRV If you bought BTC 4 years ago you would currently be up 31.48%, if you took a regular savings account at 7% over those same 4 years you would be up 32%

The absolute worst 4-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for #Bitcoin is 24%. This means that even if you bought $BTC at the worst possible time and held it for 4 years, you would still achieve an average annual return of 24% on your money. Running the numbers: $BTC price if it was to return 24% annually and held for the next.... 4 years: $215K 5 years: $267K 10 years: $782K However, the current 4-year CAGR is 50%. $BTC price if it was to return 50% annually and held for the next... 4 years: $461K 5 years: $691K 10 years: $5.2M How many years to retirement would you need if you earned a 24%, 50% annual return on your money?

@AndrewK8EL @nostrnaut Bitcoin peaked at ~40229 in Jan '21. SP500 was ~3800. That gives a Bitcoin return of ~68% over that period, and an SP500 return of ~53%.

there’s no fixin’ stoopid

@obod_bodo @RobasMackay If it is trivially easy to you, then why don't you implement it?

I think there's a way to implement a cryptocurrency that doesn't take in a wealth transfer, but which is still as secure and reliable as BTC. That seems trivially easy to me. What I see is people ravenous like zombies at the thought of siphoning money from foreign nations. Which is EXACTLY the same fucking thing our current currency does. Id rather spend my day thinking about the logistics of opening physical businesses. Not praying magic number go up.

@dampedspring Because of declining interest rates?

@DeFiTradingRoom Not to me.

Man who doesn't understand a banks balance sheet (what this chart shows) vs its income statement. Accumulated balance sheet Unrealized losses peaked in 2023 and are now improving.

@Giovann35084111 @ChattorajTK @LarryNe88994040 @adam3us @PeacefulBitcoin @Blocbillionaire @EricBalchunas Your power law observations - while certainly interesting - don't imply anything about the *causative* links though. All you're showing is that price/adoption/hashrate are closely related by power laws, but when it comes to cause and effect, you're just postulating.

The Power Law theory explains the causative links. Price=Bitcoiners^2=(time^3)^2=time^6. Concidence? No. Physics. S2F doesn't even come close in explaining how Bitcoin works and it has completely fake construction and claims. It is fake news.

🚨JUST IN: $71.8 billion Boston-based hedge fund ‘Bracebridge Capital’ reveals having exposure to #bitcoin via Ark, BlackRock and Grayscale ETFs. ARK - $307m BlackRock - $100m Grayscale - $26m Game theory playing out 🚀