Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Blockchains are built to protect value, but what do you think will happen when the technology protecting that value becomes vulnerable? There is no doubt that Quantum computing could eventually threaten elliptic-curve cryptography used by many blockchain wallets... but preparing for that possibility starts with understanding which security assumptions a system relies on in order to make better decisions. With @Starknet , this problem can be fixed with builders and users being on the safer side. Let me show you how this can be achieved: >-< STARK proofs: Starknet uses a hash-based proving system rather than relying on elliptic-curve cryptography for its core validity proofs. Hash-based cryptography is generally considered more resistant to known quantum attacks than conventional elliptic-curve schemes. >-< Programmable accounts: Starknet's native account abstraction offers flexibility to implement alternative signature verification methods, including post-quantum options. >-< The bigger picture: Proofs are only one part of blockchain security. Wallet signatures, bridges, and external dependencies also need to be evaluated. We need to have it at the back of our minds that there is no system that is automatically immune to future breakthroughs. For me, the real advantage is having a foundation that supports security evolution rather than assuming today's standards will last forever. Thoughts?