Japan's quantum backbone goes live in 2027, but a quantum *network* and a quantum *computer breaking ECDSA* are two completely different threat models — and the article conflates them. Google's own research says cracking Bitcoin's elliptic curve crypto requires fewer qubits than previously thought, but "fewer" still means hardware that doesn't exist yet. The actual near-term risk is harvest-now-decrypt-later against TLS sessions, not real-time key extraction. For crypto specifically, Vitalik already dropped an Ethereum quantum-resistance roadmap in February, Solana shipped optional quantum-safe vaults, and Bitcoin is still arguing about what to do with ~4M BTC sitting in addresses with exposed public keys from pre-2012 reuse. Post-quantum cryptography runs on classical hardware today — the migration problem is coordination, not capability.

Top comment by @Benthic