The quantum threat to Bitcoin may be far less concentrated than commonly believed – and that structural detail is quietly changing the way developers and investors think about the risk.
Related reading
A scattered problem, no target
Coins attributed to the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto are spread across approximately 22,000 separate addresses, each containing 50 BTC. That means a quantum computer that can crack Bitcoin’s encryption would have to crack thousands of individual wallets — not one big target.
According to Alex Thorn, a researcher who recently attended an industry meeting in Las Vegas, this reality is changing the way experts frame themselves the threat. The real high-value targets, Thorn noted, are large exchanges and active institutions – entities that can independently migrate to post-quantum addresses if necessary.
The distinction between long- and short-range quantum attacks is also important here. Neutral atomic quantum systems – a competing approach to the more widely known superconducting method – are only capable of long-range attacks.
I’ve had many discussions about quantum and bitcoin in Las Vegas this week, both on and off stage, with skeptics, proponents and many smart bitcoiners
I think a consensus is emerging:
1) Satoshi’s coins (P2PK) are not allowed to be touched. violating his property rights can…
— Alex Thorn (@intangiblecoins) May 2, 2026
Google recently opened a neutral atomic laboratory, shortly before publishing a major paper on quantum computers. Some observers took the move as a tacit acknowledgment that superconducting technology may have limits, although the company has not said so directly.
Property Rights and the Satoshi Question
The question of whether Bitcoin’s protocol should ever be changed to address Satoshi’s coins received strong opinions. Based on Thorn’s account of the discussions on the eventa rough consensus emerged: those coins should not be touched.
If you haven’t already, check out the great discussion between @backcode @jamesob @cryptoquick @apruden08 bee @TheBitcoinConf last week https://t.co/2F52Jwkgzo
— Alex Thorn (@intangiblecoins) May 2, 2026
Changing the protocol to move or freeze them would undermine a fundamental principle: property rights to the Bitcoin network are inviolable. Violating that principle, even with good intentions, could do lasting damage to the network’s credibility.
Still, experts acknowledged that the risk of Satoshi’s coins is manageable. Proposals such as the “hourglass mechanism” could be activated when there is a long distance involved quantum attack seemed imminent.
On-chain data cited by Thorn also shows that Bitcoin markets have regularly absorbed more than 1 million BTC in a short period of time – meaning that even a worst-case scenario of a 50% price drop could be survivable if ownership rights are preserved.
The plea for silent research
On the issue of developing post-quantum cryptography for Bitcoin, the talks in Las Vegas pointed toward a clear middle ground. Background research – building, testing, and compressing new cryptographic signatures – was generally considered worthwhile, even if implementation remains years away.
Related reading
It is not about the research itself, but about the way it is introduced. Adding something untested to the protocol, or causing governance gridlock while other upgrades wait, are the real dangers to avoid.
Featured image of Gemini, chart from TradingView