Cardano Founder Says Crypto’s Quantum Threat Is Overhyped

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson says quantum threats to blockchain are overstated today. He argues the industry already knows how to build quantum-resistant systems, but lacks efficiency and hardware alignment to switch. 

In a recent podcast discussion, he described quantum as “a big red herring,” adding that real urgency will come only when military-grade quantum benchmarks show credible progress.

Quantum Is a Red Herring For Crypto

Hoskinson explained that blockchains could migrate to quantum-secure cryptography, but the performance trade-off is steep. 

“The protocols to do that are about 10 times slower and 10 times more expensive to run,” Hoskinson said. 

He noted that no network wants to sacrifice throughput for future-proofing, stating, 

“I have a thousand transactions a second. Now I’m going to do a hundred transactions a second, but I’m quantum proof. Nobody wants to be that guy.”

Standards Remain the Gatekeeper

The Cardano founder tied quantum-security delays to standardisation. Until early government guidance landed, the sector risked adopting algorithms that would later be deprecated or unsupported. 

“We had to wait for the US government to write the standards,” he said, referencing FIPS 203–206 under NIST’s post-quantum cryptography program.

Hardware vendors now have direction to build accelerated silicon for approved post-quantum algorithms. 

Hoskinson highlighted why this matters for blockchain performance: “If you pick a non-standard protocol… you’re 100 times slower than the hardware accelerated stuff.” 

He said alignment with NIST ensures both speed and security without locking networks into inefficient cryptography for a decade.

This marks a turning point. Post-quantum standards exist, and the U. government has begun adoption. 

Large infrastructure players such as Cloudflare have already integrated PQ key exchange into mainstream traffic. It signals that migration pressure is slowly building across internet security stacks.

The Quantum Risk To Crypto Is Timed, Not Immediate

Hoskinson’s framing mirrors wider sentiment across cryptography research. Quantum threats to blockchain signatures are real but not current. 

Researchers and financial-security analysts still view CRQC-level systems as a 2030s-era event rather than a present hazard. Risk stems from when to migrate, not whether.

That window now has a reference clock. “DARPA has a program called QBI, the Quantum Blockchain Initiative,” Hoskinson said. 

According to him, the program is evaluating 11 companies to determine if practical quantum computers can exist at scale by 2033. 

He called QBI the clearest public benchmark for journalists tracking progress, adding,

“The military needs to know — when do we upgrade our crypto and how do we do that?”

Recent moves support his caution. While quantum research continues — from topological qubit work like Microsoft’s Majorana-based devices to large-scale PQ rollouts in communications infrastructure — no evidence suggests imminent cryptographic collapse. 

Post-quantum migration continues, but cost, latency, and ecosystem fragmentation remain barriers for blockchains.

Why It Matters

Hoskinson’s comments cut through a debate often driven by speculation rather than engineering data. Quantum-safe blockchain design exists, but activating it prematurely slows networks, raises transaction costs, and fragments developer tooling. 

With NIST standards finalised and hardware roadmaps forming, networks are moving toward planning, not panic.

Most experts believe the shift will land in the next decade. Hoskinson echoed that view: 

“Most smart people think there’s a strong possibility we’ll have something in the 2030s.” 

Until then, efficiency, competition, and hardware-acceleration support will dictate when blockchains flip the switch to quantum-proof cryptography.