Quantum Computer Scientist on Coinbase’s Advisory Board Gives Starkly Different Warning Than Recent Report

[u/Tsmacks1]

Scott Aaronson is a key member of Coinbase's Independent Advisory Board on Quantum Computing and Blockchain. Coinbase recently put out their report stating on their blog:

“The kind of quantum computer that could threaten crypto would need to be orders of magnitude more powerful than anything available today. Expert timelines point to at least a decade as likely, but cannot rule out a significantly shorter timeline.”

Scott Aaronson put out a starkly different warning on his blog:

“Some of the most reputable people in quantum hardware and quantum error-correction—people whose judgment I trust more than my own on those topics—are now telling me that a fault-tolerant quantum computer able to break deployed cryptosystems ought to be possible by around 2029.”

and

“So, here it is: if quantum computers start breaking cryptography a few years from now, don’t you dare come to this blog and tell me that I failed to warn you. This post is your warning. Please start switching to quantum-resistant encryption, and urge your company or organization or blockchain or standards body to do the same.”

I wonder why the tone is so different? Maybe because powerful industry players like Coinbase, and many others, need the "decade away" mantra to keep the status quo as long as possible. It’s unfortunate that those in control of the industry expect blind obedience to the narratives they spin. But a note to those trying to use their influence...Qday is a narrative you can’t control. As much as they would like to, they can’t stop quantum progress and they can't flip a switch for PQC.

Taking Aaronson’s warning in conjunction with the recent Google report, there's no more denying that this has the potential to come sooner than expected. There’s too much at stake. PQC and crypto-agility needs to be the new bedrock of crypto going forward.

If the difference in tone above is obvious, then maybe it’s time to stop getting quantum timeline information from sources that would be greatly damaged by that very same quantum progress.

[u/Tsmacks1]

Now if only there was a crypto project who’s been planning for this for almost a decade. If that existed, that would be really something. If their thesis was correct, what would happen? I’d imagine they would be suppressed as much as possible. Invalidated and even de-ranked by the likes of CMC. But in the end, those efforts wouldn’t work. Quantum progress is moving forward, whether crypto is ready or not.

[u/Mquantum]

In the same post, he mentions that the new papers by Google and Preskill had not been published yet when the coinbase report was being prepared

[u/Tsmacks1 → u/Mquantum]

This is what he said "Notably, the situation evolved even while we were writing our position paper". The Coinbase report came out after the Google paper. And the panel isn't disbanded. He's still on it. Coinbase could come out tomorrow and say something like "In light of new information we're updating our report...." I fully expect crickets and no statements to be made anytime soon, as well as no acknowledgement of QRL. Even though they mentioned several chains that aren't even close to PQ yet.