Post Quantum Signatures and Scaling Bitcoin

In the discussion about the future of Bitcoin's consensus mechanisms, particularly in the wake of potential quantum computing threats, the inclusion of non-hash-based Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) signature schemes is critically examined. The consensus among participants seems to be that such an addition would not be advisable at the current juncture. This skepticism is rooted in the apprehension that these PQC schemes could potentially be compromised by classical computational methods within the next decade. This perspective underscores a cautious approach towards altering Bitcoin's foundational security assumptions, especially given the speculative nature of their long-term viability against emerging computational capabilities.

Further skepticism is directed towards the integration of STARKs (Scalable Transparent ARguments of Knowledge) into the Bitcoin protocol as a means to bolster its security against quantum computing threats. The dialogue suggests that while the theoretical aspects of implementing such advanced cryptographic solutions are intellectually stimulating, their practical application within Bitcoin's framework appears impractical in the foreseeable future.

The conversation hints at a pragmatic stance favoring hash-based solutions as the only viable option should there arise an immediate need for a Post-Quantum signature scheme. This approach implicitly acknowledges the trade-offs involved, notably accepting the increased costs associated with hash-based methods. However, it is treated as a necessary compromise to ensure the sustained security and integrity of the Bitcoin network in the face of potential quantum computing challenges. The inclusion of a reference ([1]) presumably offers further insights or alternatives within this domain, indicating an ongoing exploration of solutions to safeguard Bitcoin against quantum vulnerabilities.