Here’s what Satoshi actually said about the “quantum” threat before people lose their minds over nonsense…

https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqszu0v5xefryrkyq5rhsnwjz5h832jk6x2v9nsjwsug0cwk83g5jwgkfgt3r

He’s winning the prize for worst “bitcoin” influencer that’s for sure. At the very least, he’s an idiot getting played by Lutnick.

Let me be more clear on why “it’s” more of a marketing label:

Bitcoin exhibits more genuine quantum properties than any supercooled chip being marketed as a “quantum computer” today.

1- Bitcoin’s UTXO set exists in a state of non-local superposition across thousands of independent nodes simultaneously with no canonical location, and that state only collapses through energy-grounded consensus when a block is confirmed. That is structurally identical to how quantum coherence resolves.

2- The ledger is not stored somewhere, it IS the network, and the network is grounded in thermodynamic reality because every block required irreversible energy expenditure to produce.

3- Bitcoin does not require an authority as proof of its function. It relies on direct experience (via node runners) and has never been hacked in over 17 years. Meanwhile, the machines being called quantum computers cannot maintain coherence for more than milliseconds, have never cracked more than 15 bits of encryption despite years of hype, yet claims that it’s a threat to BTC. They exist almost entirely as a narrative of future capability.

So yes, quantum computing as an analogy for Bitcoin is contradictory only if you accept the marketing label at face value. Or appeal to their authority.

Strip that away and the question becomes which system actually demonstrates non-locality, energy grounding, and consensus-based state resolution at scale.

Bitcoin does that right now. The supercooled chips do not.

it’s also alluding to the fact that Bitcoin is not only based n physics but it’s an example of quantum coherence or meaning it exists in multiple possible states simultaneously rather than collapsing into one definite state.(something that “quantum” computers are claiming with no evidence)

Current quantum computers require extreme isolation, fail constantly, and have produced no cryptographically relevant results… so “quantum” is largely a marketing label.

@Jack K s framework is spot on in my opinion. ⚡️

Watching Bitcoiners fall for the appeal to authority fallacy is hilarious…

Especially devs trusting a threat that you can’t see, understand and have zero evidence of. 🤣

That’s an “appeal to authority” logical fallacy. Quantum needs evidence for it’s extraordinary claims:

We don’t freak out about teleportation but that tech would be even more disruptive.

The quantum threat isn’t proven. The recent ‘15-bit encryption cracked’ experiment turned out to be false. Shor’s algorithm needs millions of stable qubits; current machines have thousands of noisy ones. Bitcoin’s secp256k1 is safe for the foreseeable future.

Mstr is not “sovereign” lol it’s not even money neither is STRC.

Saylor is looking ill man. He needs to get outside or something… geez

Free market my ass. Money is controlled by a bunch of old ass brain dead men in suits.

Fuck the Fed.