Dmitriy Gerasimov

We are $CELL - We are here

That’s why it’s not enough just to add PQ cryptography. You have to redesign the entry system. That’s why the #cellframe platform is only the choice for this. #cBTC will save the Bitcoin

And we have the solution for BTC well tested on $CELL Stay tuned, it will be announced soon #cBTC

The average Bitcoiner's response to Quantum Computing

Quantum Threat get more and more expose

@_TomHoward Nope. It’s hidding public keys but that’s only gives it little more time before the crack. With QC it’s possible to find a collision in the process of private key restore. Yes, it wouldn’t be the same private-public keypair. But they’ll have the same hash.

@naeper Zcash already on it

Switch Bitcoin to Zcash to gain untraceability and quantum resistance. Zcash is the final peer to peer electronic money.

I hope that this time, it won’t just be experts and enthusiasts who realise the reality of the quantum threat

@BMONEY0329 Yes, sure

@naeper Is it possible to have it back in ETH? I gave the team my ETH address

research.google/blog/safeguard… It’s coming, guys, it’s coming. And ONLY production ready and well tested PQ protocol is #cellframe I wasn’t going to push forward #cBTC but looks I have to do it. Stay tuned.

@BMONEY0329 Sorry for delay, we’ll refund you asap with some bonus. Hope soon we’ll have a production outside the borders to keep delivery in any destination

@naeper I have been trying to get a refund for a node since September because the border was closed, just a little disappointed because i get told i have to wait but crypto is open 24/7. The team has stopped responding to my emails since October.

@faithfa05277529 @_Checkmatey_ I believe it’s psychological issue, also most of them are programmers and mathematicians, not physicists. To realize quantum threat well you need to be deep enough in physics, better in low temperature physics, nuclear or smth similar that’s deal with quantum mechanics.

@naeper @_Checkmatey_ why it was rejected by bitcoin core ?

I read the paper, to the best of my ability. I'm willing to entertain the idea that we have a genuine QC threat on the cards. At a minimum, it would be a mistake to not take it seriously, and start developing a formal PCQ plan for Bitcoin. Having a plan, and not needing it, is far better than the other way around.

@Crypminator Im not the best communicator, my wrong. Okay we’ll issue the statement, but briefly: Yes, - sometimes we sell some to pay salaries. It wasn’t a secret. No - they are not on this screen. It’s liquidity movement by MM team. More details will be in the statement. Stay tuned.

$CELL has an important issue going on that has been concerningly unaddressed to the community. You didn’t choose to comment on it during any of the recent AMAs where as you seemingly chose to answer your *own* question that no one else asked about-Dapcash, your older project which you want to revive to possibly dilute and make more $? Anyways, the main question is has the team been selling $CELL? And if so, why? This picture clearly shows the team’s wallet participating in sus activity but the worst part is the silence. This isn’t fud, the community just wants an answer.

@WuWei114 All classic ZK signature are doomed as well. There is no production-ready ZK sign algorithm for now.

My friend. Google soon able use quantum break cryptography. This mean cryptocurrency soon be disappear. But people still want be secret. What token be number one for make privacy? Zcash. Price right now = 229.87 Bookmark this. I’m believe soon it be most high

@platoff Дружище, я конечно всё понимаю, но в плане полётов на Луну ты неправ. Пруфов этих полётов полным-полно. А не летают далее «заднего двора» в основном из-за радиации. Хотя есть ещё множество факторов. Они все решаемы, но не на текущем уровне развития технологий.

Кстати, откуда у людей уверенность что человек вообще может существовать в космосе дальше «забора» нашей Планеты. Люди летают на «заднем дворе» (до МКС — 400 километров). До Луны почти в 1000 раз больше. Если учесть что американцы скорее всего на Луну не летали, никто и не проверял что там дальше, за 400-м километром. Может чел отключается нахуй от всех каналов и сразу пердык, ну а может конечно и по солнечной системе летать, а за ней уже пердык. Неизвестно…

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.

@hosseeb Only production ready solution is #cellframe Feel free to connect with me If interested to build smth on this platform or integrate PQ cryptography on yours.

This is wild. Google Research demonstrates a ~20x more efficient implementation of Shor's algorithm that could break ECDSA keys within minutes with ~500K physical qubits. Google is now are more confident on a 2029 post-quantum transition. We are no longer looking at mid 2030s, we could have quantum computers of this scale by the end of the decade. They believe this result is so severe that they are not publishing the actual circuits. They instead published a ZKP proving that they know of the quantum circuit with these properties. This is very atypical, showing Google thinks this is serious shit. All blockchains need a transition plan ASAP. Post-quantum is no longer a drill.

@kilogramm @svab_p Бен/бин/ибн это одно и тоже. В классическом арабском это ибн(сын) и в целом считается более правильно, но в диалектах используется как бен, так и бин. Так что все три варианта правильные.

@svab_p Чета пишется через Е, означает король и королева. Принц не может быть четой. Салман - не Бен, а Бин. Бен это Гурион. Аэропорт в Тель Авиве

Знаете, после публичного - на весь мир - оскорбления принца Бен Салмана, думаю Трампа убьют. За критику королевской читы вообще-то вешают прилюдно. А тут такое! Принц это не сможет простить даже если Трамп публично извинится. Он его унизил. Такое не прощается....

@platoff На днях зарелизил свой MCP сервер по работе с памятью. С его помощью до этого агент реализовал самую быструю в мире реализацию SHA3 и допиливает самый шустрый в мире kv storage. Просто так промежду делом. Я не знаю как вообще сейчас серьёзные дела делать даже тупым людям без ИИ.

Кстати заметил очень простую корреляцию, настолько простую, очевидную и логичную, что даже странно что раньше она не была очевидна: Чем тупее чувак, тем больше у него «не работает ИИ». Ну а чем умнее тем больше он делает с помощью ИИ и агентов. Собственно так и должно быть, если текущий ИИ работает как усилитель (amplifier) оператора, и похоже так и есть. Прям четко. Мы живем в замечательное время когда и глупость человеческая сразу видна, и на поверхности, да и справедливость торжествует.

Published on our Gitlab, here is the link gitlab.demlabs.net/dap/dap-sdk/-/… How to build and run on your side mkdir build cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DBUILD_BENCHMARKS=On -DBENCHMARK_COMPETITORS=On -DBUILD_DAP_SDK_TESTS=On make tests/performance/keccak/benchmark_keccak

#cellframe SDK 6.0 is moving closer and closer to release. This version has lot of optimizations, including cryptography boost. Is there anything quicker than XKCP and TinySHA3 ? If no - we have now the fastest implementation of #sha3 hashing function now!