To summarize: You're wrong. Existing implementations have not shown that they can beat 128bit encryption. They aren't even close. That's the current situation. I'm not saying that in 5 years we won't have better technology. We might operate with 1400 qubits or be stuck at 140. Nobody really knows.
that say otherwise, so no i'm not wrong at all, for a quantum computer brute-forcing a 256 key is like for a normal computer brute-forcing 128 key, it's like dividing by two(the exponent not the number, so is equal to a root square of it), this should be clear, and with that in mind you could deduce easily, that a 128 key for a quantum computer is equal to a 64 key for a modern computer, and a 64 key can be brute-forced with a normal computer(not just one i know, but a very big farm can do it)
just simple logic, you don't need to search for anything to deduce this...
Your logic is severly flawed.
Click on your link, click on the link back to bitcointalk.org, read the post by danny.
Need a bit more?
This should be in all stickys and faq's! Seems like every week lately we have a thread on this same old topic. I know the search engine is very bad on this forum, but i think most of the noisemakers are just too lazy to even use it.
I think at least
this video from the summit should be compulsory to watch before being able to post on this forum.
...except that the speaker got the question about quantum computing wrong. I was in the audience, but I was too much of a pussy to stand up and correct him in front of everyone. Apparently, I should have done so (since he has now been cited by someone), but I'm shy like that -- especially because I was in the back and no one had any idea who I was. Oh well.
The speaker says that ECDSA is not susceptible to QCs -- that's just wrong. ECDSA is most definitely broken by QC's, as well as just
most asymmetric crypto algorithms on which internet security relies. But Bitcoin is better prepared to deal with QCs than most other crypto systems: (1) if you never reuse addresses, then no one knows your public keys and thus there's nothing for a QC to solve. By the time someone gets your public keys, you've already spent the funds, (2) the crypto algorithms in Bitcoin can be changed to quantum-resistant ones. Given that we'll probably have two decades advance notice before QCs with enough qubits exist to even threaten Bitcoin, we'll have plenty of time to make the switch.
+1 to whoever posts that picture explaining about how the laws of thermodynamics would have to be broken to crack SHA256...
The original one was posted
here and probably a few dozen other places as well. I thought the background looked a little dull, so I made my
own version.
Maybe you could fix the errors in it, because we dont need to "count" to 2
256 we need to "count" to 2
160 due the use of RIPEMD 160
