Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson says that the threats of quantum to blockchains are overestimated today. He claims that the industry already knows how to build quantum-resistant systems, but lacks efficiency and hardware compatibility for the transition.

In a recent podcast discussion, he described quantum as a 'big red herring,' adding that real urgency will only come when military-grade quantum requirements show credible progress.

Quantum is a red herring for cryptocurrencies.

Hoskinson explained that blockchains could transition to quantum-safe cryptography, but the performance compromise is steep.

"Protocols for doing this are about 10 times slower and 10 times more expensive to use," Hoskinson said.

He noted that no network wants to sacrifice throughput to ensure the future, stating,

"I have a thousand transactions per second. Now I am going to do a hundred transactions per second, but I am quantum-safe. No one wants to be that guy."

Standards remain the gatekeeper.

The founder of Cardano linked quantum cybersecurity delays to standardization. Before early government guidelines emerged, there was a risk in the field of adopting algorithms that would later be deprecated or unsupported.

"We had to wait for the U.S. government to write the standards," he said, referring to FIPS 203–206 in NIST's post-quantum cryptography program.

Hardware manufacturers now have guidelines to build 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 hardware-accelerated material."

He stated that NIST's adaptation ensures both speed and security without networks getting stuck in inefficient cryptography for a decade.

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

Large infrastructure players like Cloudflare have already integrated PQ key exchange into mainstream traffic. This indicates that transition pressure is slowly increasing in internet security systems.

Quantum risk to cryptography is scheduled, not immediate.

Hoskinson's views reflect a broader sentiment in cryptography research. Quantum threats to blockchain signatures are real but not imminent.

Researchers and financial security analysts still see CRQC-level systems as a phenomenon of the 2030s rather than a current threat. The risk arises from the transition period, not from whether the transition occurs.

There is now a reference time for this period. "DARPA has a program called QBI, Quantum Blockchain Initiative," Hoskinson said.

According to him, the program evaluates 11 companies to determine whether practical quantum computers can exist on a large scale by 2033.

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

"The military needs to know — when do we update our cryptography and how do we do it?"

Recent moves support his caution. Quantum research continues — topological qubit work, such as Microsoft’s Majorana-based devices, significant PQ deployments in communication infrastructure — there is no evidence of immediate cryptographic collapse.

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

Why this matters

Hoskinson's comments tap into a discussion often driven by speculation rather than engineering knowledge. Quantum-safe blockchain design exists, but pre-activating it slows networks, raises transaction costs, and fragments developer tools.

Once NIST standards are finalized and hardware roadmaps are formed, networks will shift to design, not panic.

Most experts believe changes will occur in the next decade. Hoskinson reiterated this view:

"Most smart people believe something will happen in the 2030s."

Until then, efficiency, competition, and support for hardware acceleration will determine when blockchains shift to quantum-safe cryptography.