Hoskinson’s Warning: Post-Quantum Shift Could Cripple Crypto Speeds by 10x

The cryptographic bedrock of blockchain faces its greatest threat yet—and it could grind everything to a crawl.

Quantum computing isn't a distant sci-fi plot anymore. It's a looming deadline on the calendar for every major blockchain network. The algorithms that currently secure billions in digital assets are, to a sufficiently advanced quantum machine, little more than a simple puzzle. When that machine arrives, the entire system needs a new lock and key.

The Performance Tax of Security

Upgrading to post-quantum cryptography isn't a simple software patch. It's a fundamental overhaul of how transactions are verified and blocks are sealed. Early research and testing suggest the new, quantum-resistant algorithms are far more computationally hungry. We're talking about a potential tenfold hit to transaction throughput and network latency. That means slower confirmations, higher fees during congestion, and a user experience that feels like stepping back to 2017.

Blockchain's Innovation Imperative

This isn't just a technical headache—it's an existential design challenge. Networks will be forced to innovate at the protocol level, seeking radical efficiencies in consensus mechanisms and data structures to offset the performance penalty. The chains that solve this equation will emerge stronger; those that don't risk obsolescence. It's a classic case of adapt or die, with your portfolio's liquidity on the line.

The race isn't just to survive the quantum break. It's to avoid becoming a digital relic, a quaint, slow-moving ledger in a high-speed financial world—because Wall Street's main gripe with crypto has always been that it's not slow *enough* for their taste.

In brief

• Post-quantum cryptography already exists and was standardized by NIST in 2024, but its implementation would drastically reduce blockchain performance.
• Hoskinson recommends monitoring DARPA’s program, which aims for 2033 to determine if industrial-scale quantum computing is feasible.
• Cardano favors network cryptography while Ethereum bets on hash functions, two distinct approaches to counter the quantum threat.
• The founder of Cardano suggests a gradual mitigation strategy rather than an immediate radical protocol change.

Solutions exist, but at what cost?

Charles Hoskinson has just broken a persistent illusion in the crypto ecosystem. Yes, post-quantum cryptography exists. No, it is not ready for massive deployment without consequences. The founder of Cardano points to a crucial timing problem: acting too early could paralyze blockchain networks.

The figures he presents are dizzying. “Post-quantum cryptography is often about 10 times slower, proofs are 10 times larger, and it is 10 times less efficient“, he explains.

Concretely, adopting these new protocols WOULD mean dividing blockchain throughput by ten. A disappointing prospect for networks already facing scalability challenges.

The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) published post-quantum standards as early as 2024. The problem therefore does not lie in the absence of technical solutions, but in their implementation cost.

Miners and validators do not yet have the hardware necessary to compensate for this performance loss. Hoskinson thus advocates for a measured approach, refusing to give in to panic.

To assess the real risk, the founder of cardano advises following DARPA’s flagship quantum computing initiative rather than tech companies’ marketing announcements. 

This U.S. agency has set 2033 as the target year to determine if industrial-scale quantum computing is viable. “It is the best independent and objective reference point“, asserts Hoskinson.

Two schools clash in crypto

The blockchain industry faces a major strategic dilemma. Two cryptographic approaches are vying for developers’ favor, and each camp defends its arguments with conviction. 

Ethereum has chosen STARKs and hash-based cryptography. Cardano, on the other hand, bets on network cryptography. Hoskinson compares the situation to the Blu-ray vs. HD DVD duel: “We will see which the market chooses.”

Hash-based cryptography is appealing for its simplicity and proven robustness. It relies on well-studied mathematical functions considered secure against future quantum attacks. Its main drawback? It excels for digital signatures but remains limited for general encryption.

Network cryptography offers more flexibility. It not only signs data but also enables encryption and advanced cryptographic tools. 

Hoskinson sees a considerable advantage here: the possibility of using standard graphics cards for cryptographic operations. “You can reuse hundreds of billions of dollars of supercomputers dedicated to AI“, he highlights. Goodbye to costly specific integrated circuits.

Faced with this uncertainty, Cardano adopts a pragmatic strategy. No radical protocol upheaval, but a gradual risk mitigation. 

The project notably explores creating post-quantum checkpoints of its blockchain history via systems like Mithril and the Midnight sidechain. A cautious approach acknowledging an unavoidable reality: “These systems always involve trade-offs“, concludes Hoskinson.

In short, the quantum threat looms over crypto, but rushing would be counterproductive. Between current performance and future security, the industry must navigate carefully. The coming decade will be decisive to determine which cryptographic approach will dominate the post-quantum era.

Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.