- Willy Woo recommends moving Bitcoin to an unspent SegWit address (bc1q) to hide the public key from future quantum threats.
- The risk is that quantum computers could use exposed public keys to derive private keys, and Taproot addresses (bc1p) expose this key.
- Some users argued this is an impractical, temporary fix that requires the coins to remain untouched until the Bitcoin network fully upgrades.
Bitcoin analyst Willy Woo is telling his followers they can lower future quantum-computing risk, basically by moving coins into a SegWit address and… well, leave them there until the network adopts quantum-safe cryptography.
Woo said that the present-day taproot addresses (the prefix that starts with bc1p) are not safe as they embed the public key into that address. “Not good,” he added.
Instead, users should create a new SegWit wallet with “bc1q”, and not bc1p. Once done, just send all your money there and wait to see if the Bitcoin network upgrades to a quantum-safe protocol, Woo claimed.
Related: Pompliano: Crypto Will Disappear Not by Collapse — but by Complete Integration
Big Scary Quantum Computers, or BSQC
His point is that powerful quantum machines could one day derive private keys from exposed public keys. Taproot outputs can reveal a public key up front, while classic SegWit keeps the public key hidden behind a hash until the coins are spent.
In the past it was about protecting your PRIVATE KEY (your seed phrase). In the age of big scary quantum computers (BSQC) that are coming, you need to protect your PUBLIC KEY also. Basically a BSQC can figure out your private key from a public key.
Willy Woo, Bitcoin analyst.Woo, however, noted this is just a temporary solution and not a fix. And it’s quite impractical as holders wouldn’t (or shouldn’t) spend or move their coins from the SegWit address because doing so reveals the public key on-chain, defeating the purpose.
He added that large custodians, like ETFs, corporate treasuries, and cold storage, can improve safeguards before a protocol upgrade arrives if they adjust their operational setups.
On timing, Woo referenced the prevailing view that practical quantum threats are unlikely before 2030 and noted that quantum-resistant standards are already advancing.
So, When Do We Start Panicking?
Not everyone agreed with Woo. Charles Edwards, founder of Capriole, argued the approach is inadequate and that Bitcoin needs a network-level upgrade as soon as possible. He warned that suggesting a seven-year window risks complacency.
SegWit (Segregated Witness) is a BTC protocol that changed how data is structured and stored by separating transaction signatures from transaction data, making transactions easier and faster to process.
But SegWit addresses just provide a temporary advantage against quantum attacks. Basically, the main threat from quantum computing is that such a device is sufficiently powerful to use Shor’s algorithm to break Bitcoin’s ECDSA, its current cryptographic signature.
Nevertheless, Quantum computing isn’t considered a threat yet because there aren’t enough qubits and, most importantly, such computers don’t have the stability to maintain their quantum state consistently over time without being disrupted by errors. That’s because qubits are extremely delicate and sensitive to any change in their environment.
Related: Study Finds One-Quarter of Polymarket Trading May Be Artificial
Credit: Source link
