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

In a recent podcast discussion, he described quantum as "a great distraction maneuver" and added that the real urgency will only arise when military quantum standards show credible progress.

Quantum is a red herring for crypto

Hoskinson explained that blockchains can migrate to quantum-safe cryptography, but the performance trade-offs are significant.

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

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

“I have a thousand transactions per second. Now I'm going to do a hundred transactions per second, but I'm quantum-proof. No one wants to be that one.”

Standards remain the gatekeeper

The founder of Cardano linked delays in quantum security to standardization. Until early government guidelines arrived, the sector risked adopting algorithms that would later be outdated or unsupported.

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

Hardware manufacturers now have guidelines for building accelerated silicon for approved post-quantum algorithms.

Hoskinson emphasized why this is important for blockchain performance: “If you choose a non-standard protocol… you are 100 times slower than the hardware-accelerated things.”

He stated that alignment with NIST guarantees both speed and security without locking networks into inefficient cryptography for a decade.

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

Major infrastructure players like Cloudflare have already integrated PQ key exchange into mainstream traffic. This indicates that the pressure for migration is slowly increasing in internet security layers.

The quantum risk for crypto is timely, not immediate

Hoskinson's vision reflects broader sentiments within cryptography research. Quantum threats to blockchain signatures are real, but not current.

Researchers and financial security analysts see CRQC-level systems as an event from the 2030s, rather than a current threat. The risk lies in when to migrate, not whether to migrate.

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

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

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

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

Recent movements support his caution. As quantum research continues – from topological qubit work like Microsoft’s Majorana-based devices to large-scale PQ implementations in communication infrastructure – there is no evidence of an impending cryptographic collapse.

The post-quantum migration continues, but costs, latency, and ecosystem fragmentation remain barriers for blockchains.

Why it matters

Hoskinson's comments break through a debate often driven by speculation rather than technical data. Quantum-safe blockchain designs exist, but activating them too early slows down networks, increases transaction costs, and leads to fragmentation of developer tools.

With NIST standards completed and hardware guidelines in development, networks are moving towards planning, not panic.

Most experts believe the shift will happen in the next decade. Hoskinson endorses that vision:

“Most smart people think there is a good chance we will have something in the 2030s.”

Until then, efficiency, competition, and hardware acceleration will determine when blockchains switch to quantum-resistant cryptography.