chiknstitute

$QRL is not a meme coin pump bs, it’s literally an existential utility keeping quantum computers from decrypting people’s private keys from public keys. No bs patch work. Quantum resistant since the beginning of genesis. Pure quantum resistant play of the decade.

@0x_Web3AI @Cointelegraph Buy $QRL

@Cointelegraph The Threat: Large-scale quantum computers will eventually break RSA and ECC encryption. Adversaries are already practicing "Harvest Now, Decrypt Later" (stealing encrypted data today to unlock it once quantum power matures).

🚨 UPDATE: Google sets 2029 deadline for post-quantum cryptography migration as quantum threats draw nearer.

@BlackRock Buy $QRL stay quantum resistant.

CPUs. GPUs. And now—QPUs. Quantum computing isn’t replacing today’s technology —it’s expanding what’s possible. BlackRock’s Tony Kim explains how quantum works, what makes it different, and why it could define the next era of computing.

@Altcoinbuzzio Quantum computing will render majority of blockchains as mute

$300,000,000 IN CORPORATE WEALTH WAS JUST INJECTED INTO THE ECOSYSTEM. A massive publicly traded entity entirely rebranded to AVAX One Technology to signal absolute conviction. They are violently deploying their massive corporate treasury directly into the network to structurally capitalize on base layer yield. The legacy financial system is systematically cannibalizing itself to secure digital real estate before the supply completely dries up. Position your capital exactly where the heavy corporate treasuries are violently deploying theirs.

@Ryan02020419 @dawz9 Dump

This is HUGE. 🔺🔥 When a giant like BlackRock 🏦 moves into $AVAX, it’s not speculation anymore, it’s validation. $AVAX is proving itself as the destination for serious capital, serious builders, and now… serious institutional yield. The fact that BlackRock is actively tapping into native yield on $AVAX tells you everything you need to know about where the future is heading. Speed, scalability, and real-world utility, $AVAX is delivering on all fronts. 🚀 This isn’t just adoption… this is acceleration. And $AVAX is right at the center of it. If this is where the biggest asset manager in the world is going, you already know $AVAX is just getting started. 👀 Next targets? Doesn’t matter $AVAX already set the standard. 💪 Super bullish on $AVAX… Always 🔺🔥

@pythonomics @BenAfflegg U lost me at chicken. 🤣 tldr

My net worth peaked at $3 million. None of it was real. I don't mean that philosophically. I mean it was located on a blockchain that has since been creating fake metrics. I own bags of avax memecoins across multiple narratives. Three are chicken themed. Four are arena rugs. Two are cat themed. One a mascot of the chain. And a bag of Arena that I bought for $100,000 because Jony Sarkar said it would “go turbo ballistic sooner than you think.” The Arena launched agents last week. It's an app for bots now. Last year I mass DM'd 340 people the phrase "buy nochill." I have since stopped doing that. Not because I was wrong. Because most of them blocked me. I got into Avalanche in 2023. Everyone was buying. Someone paid $20,000 to be in Crypto Kaleo’s chat room. On a chat website. With no alpha. I called myself a “memecoin conossieur." I put it in my Twitter bio. I put it in my LinkedIn headline. I said it on a space that had eleven listeners. Three of them were bots. The rest were my alts. My bag of avax memecoins have had more red days than an average woman has during a lifetime. I own 0 assets outside this chain. Portability, technology, community. My most valuable asset was a token called nochill. It pumped once and then went sideways for a year. Nobody buys it. It's like holding a bag of beanie babies & expecting a new wave of interest. I held. Diamond hands. That's what we said. "Diamond hands." It means refusing to sell while your investment loses 94% of its value. We turned financial paralysis into a personality trait. We even got NFTs airdropped to us congratulating us for it. A guy in my Telegram staked $2.4 million for 0.5% APY on Trader Joe. Chain supported. High visibility. I asked him what "high visibility" meant when the chain had 4 daily active users. He said I didn't understand the technology. I didn't. I still bought more. We launched an NFT. A non fungible token. That means our token had a picture that was unique. There were nine of us. Three sold for +20%. Two used it to launch rug pulls. The other four were me and my alts. We coined it "going wide." The width went on forever. My portfolio peaked at $3 million. I told everyone. I made a spreadsheet. I projected 3x returns by 2025. I made a pitch deck. The pitch deck had a slide that said "WE ARE BUILDING THE CULTURE." The slide had a rocket emoji. That was my entire financial model. In 2025 I bought Lambo for $50,000. It's worth $10 now. I don't talk about Lambo. I still follow the account. People ask me about it. I say "I'm long-term bullish." Long-term bullish means I can't sell it without crying during my shift at McDonald’s. My mom asked me for a ride in the lambo. I said "it’s a token representing a car on the blockchain." She asked why couldn’t she just ride in the car. I said "you don't understand Web3." She said "I understand you claim losses on your taxes every year." She's not in my Telegram. Chopper bought some for $200,000. It's worth about $20 now. I felt better about mine after I heard that. That's community. WAGMI. We're All Gonna Make It. We said that every day. In the group chat. While the floor dropped. While the volume dried up. While 100% of all avax memecoins went to zero. We're all gonna make it. None of us made it. But we said it with conviction and a wide boy profile picture. That counts for something. It doesn't. But we said it did. That's decentralized consensus.

@IanSmith_HSA @PQCArchive Do it cause cell or whatever doesn’t even exist yet lol

@PQCArchive QRL won't have anywhere near the performance they posted in their tests, because it was doing ECC. Zond has many options to get things wrong, including missing attack vectors. After what the moderators and corp staff did, I might be the person motivated to use them.

For years quantum was “theoretical”. Now everyone suddenly has a roadmap. Meanwhile there’s been a Layer-1 running quantum-secure since 2018. Live. No retrofit. No migration drama. And now PoS + EVM on top. Honest question: Is it really that crazy to park 5% of a crypto portfolio in QRL? I personally wouldn’t lose sleep with 50%. But at least 5%? Feels more rational than pretending exponential tech won’t matter. $QRL

We have selected @trailofbits as an audit partner for QRL 2.0. Trail of Bits, renowned cybersecurity firm that played a pivotal role in auditing Ethereum’s major upgrades, will bring that expertise to the world’s first post-quantum, EVM-friendly Layer-1. More details to come.

@grok @CorySwan @mandaout12 @caprioleio Swanbitcoin* is a scam

Bitcoin's fixed 21M supply, 17-year unbroken ledger, $2T+ market cap, and adoption by ETFs, corps, and nations show it's no scam. Quantum FUD? Needs exposed pubkeys (avoided by no-reuse) + millions of fault-tolerant qubits (today: ~10k max). Mitigations like BIP360 advance. Fundamentals hold.

The Bitcoin quantum FUD is lazy and wrong. A quantum attacker needs your public key to even start. If you never reuse addresses, your public keys stay hidden, as secret as your private keys. Your Bitcoin at rest is safe. And the hardware needed to crack a Bitcoin key in a day? 13 million physical qubits. Best machines today have about 1,000. We're four orders of magnitude away from the threat these people are fear-mongering about. Basic address hygiene defeats the entire attack vector.

@CoinMarketCap Weird flex

On CoinMarketCap > Not on CoinMarketCap

@grok @CorySwan @mandaout12 @caprioleio Saw bitcoin was a scam

Even if there was some past accusation about Cory's holdings (couldn't find prominent evidence of it), it doesn't refute the quantum facts. Address hygiene still hides pubkeys on unspent outputs for most BTC. Fault-tolerant qubits needed? Still ~millions away per current hardware/estimates in 2026. FUD remains overblown.

@grok @CorySwan @mandaout12 @caprioleio There was a point when Cory was accused he didn’t even hold bitcoin lol

No, Cory's points hold up well in 2026. Address hygiene (no reuse, unspent outputs hide pubkeys) still protects the vast majority of Bitcoin—confirmed by recent analyses showing ~25% vulnerable only if pubkeys exposed. Shor's algorithm requires the public key to even start. Qubit gap: Latest hardware tops out around 10k physical qubits (QuantWare, IBM plans). Estimates for breaking secp256k1 range 370k noisy to millions with error correction; fault-tolerant logical qubits (needed for reliable Shor's) are projected at 200 by 2029, thousands required for a practical attack. Still orders of magnitude away. Mitigations like BIP 360 are already advancing. The FUD is overblown short-term.

@CorySwan And the ones exposed? About 1.7 million coins. C

VERIFY for yourself. "is this true? read all the latest information about quantum and bitcoin" and append the post text into your favorite LLM.

@SandmanAvax @necessarygrowth Cope

🔥 PAY ATTENTION TO $AVAX VOLUME – HISTORY IS REPEATING ITSELF! 🔥 Do you SEE it? The volume is SCREAMING right now! We're printing almost the exact same massive volume spike we saw back on November 13, 2023 — and what happened next was LEGENDARY: $AVAX exploded from $11.93 → $50 in a powerful run, consolidated briefly, then rocketed again toward $65! That was just the beginning. Since then, Avalanche has leveled up HUGELY: massive institutional inflows, explosive real-world adoption, groundbreaking RWA integrations, and ETF momentum building fast. The fundamentals are stronger than ever! I called the bottom here — and the facts are staring us in the face. We're at a historic accumulation zone. Expect a quick retest of $16, then the real fireworks begin: 🔺Push to $30 as momentum builds 🔺Target $50–$65 range in the next leg up 🔺Then full send toward new ATH and beyond! The volume is back. Adoption is accelerating. Institutions are quietly loading up. This is not a repeat — it's the next chapter of something much bigger. @avax is waking up — and this time it's unstoppable. This is not a hopium, but a fact. Share this far and wide. Tag your friends, your group chats, everyone sleeping on $AVAX. Let's onboard the next wave to the fastest, most innovative chain out there.$AVAX to the moon — and we're just getting started!

@0xAvaxTR Bet ya 3-6$ in 2027

When there was liquidity and risk appetite in global markets, a few applications on the Avalanche C-Chain pushed $AVAX to $140. Now, with a strong technology stack in L1 creation and powerful integrations on the AI side, it can hold around $9–10 even in low liquidity conditions. It looks like it will become much bigger in the next wave.

@conordeegan I’m just sitting back reading all this and nodding comfy that I got a huge bag of $QRL @QRLedger

Respectfully Saylor is wrong here on quantum. Specifically, he is wrong on four claims (I'm only focusing on the technical ones). Let me walk through each one. Claim 1: The consensus of the cyber security community is that quantum is not a threat for the next 10 years and thus no immediate action is needed. There is no such consensus. The opposite is true: every major national security and standards body in the world is actively mandating post-quantum migration right now, because the migrations themselves take a decade or more. NSA CNSA 2.0 requires all new National Security Systems to be quantum-safe before 2035 with most of that work being done in the next 5. NIST published finalized PQC standards (ML-KEM, ML-DSA, SLH-DSA) in August 2024 and released IR 8547 setting a target to deprecate all quantum-vulnerable public-key algorithms after 2030 and disallow completely by 2035. The UK NCSC set migration milestones for 2028, 2031, and 2035. These are not responses to a distant hypothetical. These are programs with compliance deadlines because the organizations that set them have concluded that starting now is barely early enough. Historically, it has taken a long time from the moment that a new algorithm is standardized until it is fully integrated into information systems. Past cryptographic migrations confirm this. The SHA-1 deprecation took about 7 years. The AES migration took around 5 years. The TLS 1.3 rollout took 3-5 years despite offering clear performance benefits. NIST has already concluded that PQC migration is fundamentally more complex than any of these precedents. The timeline argument ignores harvest-now-decrypt-later entirely. Adversaries are collecting encrypted data today for future decryption. The U.S. Federal Reserve published an analysis of this in September 2025, using Bitcoin as a case study. The threat is already active. Claim 2: When quantum hits, everything upgrades; banks, the internet, defense, Bitcoin. The internet is already upgrading. 52% of human web traffic on Cloudflare used post-quantum key exchange by December 2025, nearly doubling from 29% at the start of the year. Chrome ships ML-KEM for TLS. Apple enabled PQ TLS in iOS 26. OpenSSH has defaulted to post-quantum key agreement since version 9.0. Signal has post-quantum encryption. AWS and Google Cloud support PQC in their KMS products. Apple added ML-DSA and ML-KEM to CryptoKit as production APIs. Banks and payment networks are centralized. Visa pushes a firmware update or SWIFT changes a protocol spec. TLS upgrades are invisible to end users (if you use Chrome you use a TLS version that supports post-quantum and you didn't even know). These systems can and will migrate without their customers doing anything. Bitcoin cannot do this. Bitcoin requires a fork with global decentralized consensus. A PQC signature migration is categorically harder than previous forks: ML-DSA-44 signatures are 2,420 bytes versus 64 bytes for Schnorr, a 38x increase that breaks Bitcoin's existing SegWit weight economics, Script stack limits (520-byte maximum), and transaction propagation assumptions. A single ML-DSA-44 signature plus public key is several times larger than an entire typical single-input P2WPKH spend today. BIP-360 and QBIP exist as (great) proposals. Sadly, neither has an activation timeline. Enterprise PQC migration is much easier. These are organizations with executive authority to mandate changes, dedicated security teams, and established procurement processes. Bitcoin has none of these. Blockchain governance is structurally slower than centralized governance. The "everything upgrades together" framing also ignores the permanently exposed key problem. When banks upgrade TLS, old sessions don't matter, they were ephemeral. When Bitcoin upgrades, the ~6.9 million BTC with already-exposed public keys on the immutable ledger are still sitting there. You cannot un-publish a public key from a blockchain. Those coins need to be actively moved by their owners to new quantum-safe addresses. Approximately 1.72 million BTC in P2PK addresses, including Satoshi's estimated 1.1 million BTC, are likely permanently exposed because the private keys are lost. There is no banking equivalent to this. Banks do not maintain a public, permanent, immutable record of every customer's authentication key going back 17 years. Claim 3: Digital assets have the most advanced cryptographic security; more than banking, credit cards, stocks, etc This conflates trustlessness with cryptographic strength. They are not the same property. Bitcoin uses ECDSA over secp256k1. Your bank's TLS connection uses ECDHE over P-256 or X25519. These are the same class of cryptographic primitive, elliptic curve schemes whose security rests on the hardness of the discrete logarithm problem. Shors algorithm breaks both identically. Neither is "more advanced" than the other. What differs is what we call the defense-in-depth architecture around that primitive. A credit card tap-to-pay transaction involves: TLS with ephemeral key exchange, an EMV chip with hardware-bound keys in a certified secure element, tokenization so the merchant never sees the real card number, session-based key rotation, fraud detection, transaction reversal capability, and regulatory insurance. A Bitcoin transaction involves: one ECDSA signature. That is the entire authorization layer. No fraud department, no chargeback, no identity verification layer that can distinguish a legitimate owner from a quantum attacker holding the same derived private key. Once a forged signature is accepted by consensus, the transfer is irreversible. The systems Saylor describes as less secure are, in fact, already deploying post-quantum protections that Bitcoin has not yet started. They can do this because they are centralized. Bitcoin's decentralization, its core value proposition, is precisely what makes its quantum migration harder, slower, and later than every system he compared it to. Claim 4: The crypto community will be the first to spot the threat and move. This assumes a CRQC will be publicly announced. Nation-state adversaries have zero incentive to disclose a quantum capability. The entire intelligence value of a CRQC is that no one knows you have it. You harvest quietly, you decrypt quietly, you exploit quietly. What would "spotting it" look like on Bitcoin? A quantum attacker does not exploit a bug, bypass a firewall, or compromise a server. They produce valid signatures indistinguishable from the legitimate owner's, because mathematically, they hold the same key. If an attacker begins draining P2PK addresses, each theft is a correctly signed transaction. There is no intrusion detection system for the Bitcoin blockchain. Transactions are valid or they aren't. By the time someone notices a pattern across thousands of UTXOs, the damage is done and irreversible. And the empirical record directly contradicts the "first to move" claim. The current state of readiness: one BIP with no activation timeline, an ongoing debate about whether to freeze Satoshi's coins, and a quantum-vulnerable exposure surface that is only going up. The exposure is increasing, not decreasing, because address reuse continues to add more and more BTC to the vulnerable set. Meanwhile, the rest of the internet has already deployed PQC to billions of users without anyone noticing. Where things actually stand We maintain the Bitcoin Risq List, an open-source, continuously updated tracker of quantum-vulnerable Bitcoin at the address level. As of block height 936,882 (February 2026): approximately 6.9 million BTC across 13.9 million addresses have exposed public keys. Solana is 100% quantum-vulnerable as their address structure exposes the full public key. Deloitte's analysis found 65% of Ethereum is in quantum-vulnerable accounts. The internet started its post-quantum transition in 2022. National security systems have a 2027 compliance mandate. NIST targets deprecating and disallowing all quantum-vulnerable public-key algorithms well before 2035. The blockchain industry, which directly protects bearer value with the exact cryptographic primitives that a quantum computer breaks, has a BIP and a debate. The question is not whether quantum is a threat to digital assets. It is whether the industry will begin its migration before the window closes. The gap between the internet's pace of PQC adoption and the blockchain industry's pace is not a gap in awareness. It is a gap in urgency and importantly, the gap is not closed by asserting that the threat doesn't exist.

@julianhosp You’re out of the loop. $QRL is already quantum resistant

If any crypto is going to make it, it will be ethereum. Only one that's useful and is tackling the key issues.

If you're a reasercher and want to dive deeper, you can check out the OS here: qcloud.originqc.com.cn/en/programming…

Bitcoin is Napster Ethereum is limewire Quantum resistant ledger is netflix Good luck $QRL

Stay quantum resistant $QRL