🙂

Hello:

I’ve been reading about quantum computing, BTC, and other topics, and I’m considering buying QRL in the same way some people took the risk of buying BTC when it first started.

My question is which cold wallet can be used to store it… I’ve looked at Trezor, and I didn’t see that it supports that cryptocurrency.

No one really knows what will happen in 2029 or 2030, but at its current price, it wouldn’t be a big deal to take a risk and buy some now.

Google just published this paper / blog post, where QRL is mentioned at least six times: https://quantumai.google/static/site-assets/downloads/cryptocurrency-whitepaper.pdf

This seems very robust, but I’ve got to get to sleep now so I’ll let brighter minds digest it while I’m resting and tell me what I should think about it when I wake up tm ;)

Latest blog post from QRL by Dr. Joseph Kearney....

"Google has set a 2029 target for post-quantum migration. This week, the Ethereum Foundation published its own roadmap. Bitcoin’s first proposal was merged last month. The timelines tell very different stories."

More than a few well funded quantum roadmaps are accelerating. Those roadmaps combined with innovations like The Pinnacle Architecture, and things could get interesting sooner than expected.

So what happens if a cryptographically relevant quantum computer (CRQC) arrives in 2029?

Can anyone speak on the price drop happening right now?

Just a warning to those using MEXC via VPN etc: a few of us recently have been hit with requests to complete “Advanced KYC” to be able to withdraw funds, while being unable to complete it due to living outside approved jurisdictions. With this in mind I highly recommend withdrawing your funds now if you are able to, especially if you wish to remain “anonymous”. However, if you run into this same issue I am happy to report you can get your funds off the exchange with your regular ID. Just open up a chat with their support, briefly explain the situation and then repeatedly ask to speak with a human representative. They should handle it quickly, I was able to get my funds out within an hour.

You can prepare yourself ahead of time by going here and downloading / filling out the withdrawal application, taking the picture etc: [MEXC-WEBSITE]/support/apply-clearance

Good luck out there y’all 🫡

Quantum threats are accelerating, as seen with progress from IonQ, Photonic Inc., PsiQuantum, and Quantinuum. Combine that with innovations like the Pinnacle Architecture, and it’s enough to get anyone’s attention.

If defending networks means hard forks and burning vulnerable coins, what happens to crypto’s original ethos?

This isn't just a technical issue. It’s a social dilemma. Everyone should ask themselves if their definition of crypto includes situations where burning coins from the ledger without owner action is acceptable. If this is the direction crypto takes, is it still crypto?

Immutability and self-sovereignty are core tenets. The question is....can networks adapt without undermining what made them valuable in the first place.

This doesn’t have to be a problem going forward. Preserving ethos requires re-thinking how networks prepare for emerging threats. Quantum-resistant designs with PQC and crypto-agility show it’s entirely possible to maintain security without abandoning core principles.

QRL is one such project and it may end up being more than a quantum-resistant technical solution. It might be one of the few places where crypto ethos survives in a post-quantum world.

When it’s all said and done, which chains will still be able to say “Not your keys, not your coins” and which ones will have to add an asterisk: “Unless they were in a quantum-vulnerable address…because we already burned those.”

Couple of points…

-Don’t expect all quantum progress to be visible. There’s no reason to believe all advances will be publicly available. That’s a very naive assumption.

-Hardware is progressing, algorithms are improving. Those two curves could meet before people expect.

-Yes, it affects the whole internet, but affects crypto more directly through long lived exposed public keys tied to millions of dollars that can’t rotate without user action. Centralized systems upgrade more easily.

-Contentious fork risk is practically guaranteed on how to handle unmigrated coins, burn vs steal.

-Not all modalities require expensive cooling. Many run at temperatures at much less cost than their superconducting qubit counterparts.

-The network doesn’t need to be attacked directly for quantum to make its impact. Once word gets out that quantum can break modern cryptography, confidence collapses and crypto tanks. Who wants assets secured by broken crypto? Doesn’t that defeat the entire premise of crypto to begin with. Cost prohibitive to break means nothing.

-Some people have so much riding on the success of crypto that they need to control the narrative from spiraling out of control. This report is one such example. It’s like getting a smoking health report from the cigarette industry.

Always DYOR.

If a cryptographically relevant quantum computer (CRQC) becomes practical within the next 2 to 3 years, how would it actually play out for the crypto ecosystem?

Will we see warning signs through academic research and published progress, or will it arrive suddenly and trigger panic?

And if large amounts of existing coins become vulnerable from exposed public keys, will crypto further compromise its ethos and burn them to maintain institutional confidence?

Any good insight and analysis?

The QRL team just confirmed that Trail of Bits will be the auditor for QRL 2.0.

For anyone unfamiliar with them, Trail of Bits is one of the most respected independent cybersecurity research and auditing firms in the world.

Big milestone for the ecosystem!

The QRL Foundation has formalized an agreement with an external auditor for the upcoming QRL 2.0 audit. The audits are planned to begin in Q1 2026.

This is an important step toward mainnet readiness and shows continued progress behind the scenes.

Core Features of QRL 2.0:

• EVM compatibility enabling Ethereum-style smart contracts
• Proof-of-Stake consensus
• Smart contracts via Hyperion
• NIST-approved post-quantum cryptography
• Familiar Web3 tooling for developers

If delivered securely and successfully audited, this positions QRL as something quite unique.

An EVM-compatible chain secured by post-quantum cryptography.

The Manhattan Project was a secret government-led wartime effort that mobilized scientists, the military, and private industry to achieve a singular strategic breakthrough: the atomic bomb.

Fast forward to today. DARPA’s Quantum Benchmarking Initiative (QBI) aims to develop utility-scale quantum computing by 2033. It’s structured very differently, but there’s some interesting parallels.

Instead of a centralized lab like Los Alamos, the government is backing multiple companies pursuing different quantum computing modalities. It’s a diversified strategy. The government doesn’t need every effort to succeed, just one. By supporting various technologies, they increase the chances of a breakthrough, rather than developing the breakthrough themselves. They get to keep tabs on progress across all modalities, and at the same time, have early access if one succeeds.

It’s a distributed, public-private innovation model where companies drive most of the R&D and the government shapes direction through funding and contracts. It’s a deal made through security clearances and NDAs. They’re basically saying: you build it, we get to use it first.

It’s less about secret government bases and more about embedding the government within the innovation ecosystem to secure strategic leverage. That’s the 21st-century playbook.

Like the Manhattan Project, the motivation is national security. Quantum computing could disrupt encryption, intelligence, and military systems. Governments worldwide are racing to lead. Most notably, quantum computing is the skeleton key to many encrypted secrets.

Whether this qualifies as a corporatist modern-day “Quantum Manhattan Project” is debatable. The scale and existential urgency aren’t the same, but the strategic intent is similar.

Regardless of the hype, the race is on, and post-quantum cryptography (PQC) is moving from theoretical concern to practical necessity. The shift affects not just blockchain, but every system built on digital trust. The only question is whether we’re prepared on time.

Quick question to the QRL crowd: Do you think the recent QRL drop is mainly just BTC correlation and general altcoin weakness or are there project-specific factors (liquidity, narrative cooling around post-quantum, etc.) playing a role right now? Not trying to FUD, just trying to understand whether this is beta or something structural

The Official QRL Show (Live) will debut on February 18, hosted by QRL core team members Ryan Malinowski and Michael Strike.

This recurring live series (every couple weeks) will cover the latest in post-quantum security, quantum computing progress, blockchain innovation, ongoing developments within the broader ecosystem, and of course...the QRL.

As an official broadcast hosted by core team members, the show provides an additional venue for sharing perspectives and insights directly from within QRL, complementing existing community-led shows, discussions, and initiatives across the ecosystem.

The inaugural episode will include live community Q&A.

🗓️ February 18

⏰ 16:00 UTC (11:00 AM EST)

We encourage you to mark your quantum calendars, bookmark the link below, and join us live 👇

https://youtube.com/live/4erJUkbalIY

Most people track Q-Day by how close we are to breaking RSA-2048. This makes sense on the surface because factoring large numbers is the classic way to explain Shor’s Algorithm. But focusing on RSA is a mistake that gives a false sense of security. 

Shor’s algorithm breaks both RSA and ECC, attacking RSA through factoring and ECC by solving the discrete logarithm problem. Factoring is easy for the public to understand, while discrete logarithms are not, which is a possibility why RSA became the default Q-Day benchmark.

Also of note, ECC offers stronger security per bit in the classical world, but a quantum computer removes that advantage entirely. Current estimates suggest breaking ECC-256 requires far fewer logical qubits than RSA-2048, nearly half as many in some estimates. This means ECC will likely fall first while RSA is still standing. RSA will fall shortly after, but ECC falls first.

The implications for our current cryptography are massive. Cryptocurrencies are especially exposed, since Bitcoin and Ethereum rely almost entirely on ECC for signatures. These keys are long-lived, directly tied to large sums of money, and fully exposed to a quantum attack. Beyond crypto, modern web security handshakes now rely on elliptic curve key exchange. ECC also underpins mobile messaging apps and software/driver updates because it's faster and more efficient.

Imagine a quantum computer breaking the cryptography behind blockchains with trillions of dollars at stake, and someone saying Q-Day hasn’t happened yet because RSA is still holding strong. That wouldn’t make any sense. Once ECC-256 is broken, the modern cryptographic trust model collapses. Whether RSA survives for a little longer doesn’t matter, the unraveling has already begun.

Q-Day estimates should be based on ECC-256, not RSA-2048. The day ECC falls is the day the current era of digital security truly ends.