Bitcoin’s Quantum Risk: Former Pharma Exec Martin Shkreli Says Shor’s Algorithm Is the One to Watch

by

Well, well, well, if it ain’t Martin Shkreli-yes, the same former pharma exec who made the whole world cringe. Now, he’s talking about the big bad future of Bitcoin and quantum computing. In an exclusive chat with Isabel Foxen Duke, Shkreli went on about Shor’s algorithm, claiming it might one day unravel the cryptography behind Bitcoin wallets. But-don’t get too excited-today’s quantum hardware is about as capable as a rusty spoon in a high-tech kitchen. 🍴🔧

Satoshi’s Keys and Quantum Dreams: Shkreli on Timelines and Tactics

During the Bitcoin Rails podcast #38 with Isabel Foxen Duke, Martin Shkreli opened up the whole quantum can of worms. Now, before you go running off screaming about the end of Bitcoin, he made it clear: quantum won’t be replacing your Nvidia graphics card anytime soon. But-when it comes to Shor’s algorithm and Bitcoin? Well, that’s where it gets spicy. 🥵

But here’s the kicker: quantum computers are slow, noisy, and fragile. Shkreli explained that to pull off a credible attack on Bitcoin, we’d need to somehow improve the error rates by orders of magnitude. Which, let’s face it, is easier said than done. We’re talking a massive leap forward in quantum accuracy before you can even think about cracking Bitcoin’s cryptography. 🤯

The main issue? Fidelity. Quantum circuits, which are like the digital equivalent of a house of cards, rely on each logic operation (or “gate”) to succeed with a certain probability. The current best? A cool “99.99%.” Impressive? Sure. But when you stack millions of these operations together, you end up with a sloppy mess. To make it work? Either you need to build a cleaner quantum qubit or slap on some super fancy error-correction codes. Good luck with that! 🃏

Shkreli threw IBM’s ~150-qubit systems under the bus, calling them “educational” but far from the kind of muscle needed for a Bitcoin-scale attack. And as for logical qubits? He’s thinking around a million logical qubits, which could translate to a ridiculous number of physical qubits. Imagine hundreds of millions, maybe even a billion of them. No big deal, right? 😏

Oh, and for those who’ve been living under a rock, Shkreli got out of prison in 2022 after a little “misadventure” involving securities fraud. But that didn’t stop him from diving headfirst into the world of decentralized finance and blockchain. He even used Uniswap while behind bars-talk about innovation! 🏦🚔

But let’s get back to quantum. Shkreli was quick to point out that quantum isn’t “fast” in terms of clock speed. In fact, it’s slow as molasses, usually measured in kilohertz. But the real magic happens with certain algorithms (like Shor’s) that turn exponential time into polynomial time. Sure, it sounds fancy, but right now, we’re just not there yet. 🚀

As for timelines, Shkreli wouldn’t make any bold predictions. He mentioned that a Shor-class attack on Bitcoin’s elliptic curve is likely decades away-at least, given where today’s quantum machines stand in comparison to what’s needed for a proper attack. 🗓️

He also threw in a little nugget of wisdom: AI might play a role in cracking Bitcoin’s cryptography. But when it comes to who’s likely to beat ECC first, Shkreli still gives quantum the edge. ⏳

Ethics made an appearance too. When asked about “hacking Satoshi’s coins,” Shkreli was all about the intellectual challenge, not the treasure. He wouldn’t want to hold those tokens, even if the math worked out. Apparently, stealing money from Bitcoin wallets isn’t his idea of fun. 😎

FAQ💡

  • What exactly does Shor’s algorithm threaten? It targets the tough math (factoring/discrete logs) behind the cryptography that powers Bitcoin wallets, but only if we have a large, error-corrected quantum computer.
  • Why aren’t today’s quantum machines a risk? The error rates stack up when performing millions of quantum gates, and current fidelity is still too low for a full Shor attack.
  • How many qubits would an attack need? According to Shkreli, we’d need roughly a million logical qubits, which would mean hundreds of millions to a billion physical qubits when accounting for error correction. Yikes.
  • Could AI break Bitcoin’s cryptography first? Shkreli acknowledges that mathematical breakthroughs aided by AI are possible, but he still views quantum as the more likely first mover in the race against elliptic curve cryptography.

Read More

2025-10-16 18:21