Michael Saylor Debunks Urgent Bitcoin Quantum Threat as ‘Ploy’
Is the potential of quantum computing keeping you up at night, especially regarding the safety of your Bitcoin holdings? You’re not alone. The idea that super-powerful computers could one day break Bitcoin’s cryptography is a frequently discussed topic. However, MicroStrategy executive chairman Michael Saylor offers a distinctly different perspective, dismissing the Bitcoin quantum threat as largely a marketing tactic.
Michael Saylor on the “Quantum Ploy”
Speaking on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on June 6, 2025, Michael Saylor didn’t mince words. He characterized the hype around quantum computing’s danger to Bitcoin as primarily a strategy used by those promoting new, often speculative, tokens. Saylor believes this narrative serves to create fear and market “quantum yo-yo tokens” rather than addressing a genuine, imminent risk to Bitcoin security.
While acknowledging that research firms like Project Eleven point to potential vulnerabilities – suggesting millions of Bitcoin could be at risk if quantum machines become powerful enough to crack elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) keys associated with exposed public addresses – Saylor remains unconcerned about practical threats from major tech companies.
His argument is straightforward: even if giants like Google or IBM developed a quantum computer capable of breaking modern cryptography, they wouldn’t release it. Such a move would destabilize global financial systems, governments, and their own businesses, which rely heavily on current encryption standards. As Saylor put it, “Google and Microsoft aren’t going to sell you a computer that cracks modern cryptography because it would destroy Google and Microsoft and the US Government and the banking system.”
How Would Bitcoin Address a Real Quantum Computing Threat?
Saylor contends that if a legitimate quantum computing threat were to emerge, the Bitcoin network is adaptable. The solution isn’t panic, but upgrades. He explained that Bitcoin’s core developers and hardware manufacturers would implement necessary fixes, much like how traditional software and systems are updated.
- Bitcoin network hardware upgrade
- Bitcoin network software upgrade
This process, according to Saylor, mirrors how entities like Microsoft, Google, or government systems handle security advancements. “We’re just going to upgrade the software,” he stated, emphasizing the network’s ability to evolve.
Comparing Quantum Risk to Everyday Threats
To put the perceived quantum computing risk into perspective, Saylor compared it to more common dangers. He estimates that you are 10,000 times more likely to lose your Bitcoin through a phishing attack than to a quantum computer hack.
Saylor considers Bitcoin exceptionally secure, calling it “the hardest thing in the universe to hack.” He argues that other systems – your banking account, Google account, Microsoft account, and other digital assets – are orders of magnitude weaker and thus more likely targets for malicious actors long before Bitcoin faces a quantum threat.
Putting the Threat to the Test
Despite Saylor’s confidence, the potential threat is being explored. Project Eleven launched the “Q-Day Prize” competition in April 2025, challenging participants to crack a portion of a Bitcoin key using a quantum computer over the next year. The goal is to assess the urgency of the threat and identify potential quantum-proof solutions for Bitcoin’s long-term security.
Current quantum machines from IBM (Heron chip, 156 qubits) and Google (Willow, 105 qubits) are still far from the estimated 2,000 logical qubits needed to break a full 256-bit ECC Bitcoin key. While their current capacity is not an immediate threat, Project Eleven notes they are significant enough to warrant continued attention and research.
MicroStrategy’s View Remains Unchanged
As a major holder of Bitcoin, MicroStrategy‘s stance on the asset’s long-term viability is crucial. Saylor’s comments reinforce the company’s belief in Bitcoin’s fundamental security and its capacity to adapt to future technological challenges. The focus remains on adoption and the network’s resilience, rather than perceived distant threats driven by marketing narratives.
Conclusion: Sleep Soundly?
Michael Saylor’s perspective offers a calming counterpoint to concerns about the Bitcoin quantum threat. He frames it not as an existential crisis, but largely as noise generated for marketing purposes. While acknowledging the theoretical potential of future quantum computers, he highlights the impracticality of such a threat being weaponized and emphasizes Bitcoin’s inherent upgradeability. For now, according to Saylor, everyday threats like phishing pose a vastly greater risk to your Bitcoin than the distant possibility of a quantum hack, allowing holders to “sleep soundly at night.”
