Have you recently been scared by the news headline "Quantum Computer is about to crack Crypto Assets"? Don't be too nervous, the key issue might not be what you think.

A well-known blockchain project founder recently shared a thought-provoking viewpoint: the real trouble is not the threat of hackers, but rather that we are forced to pay a huge price ten years in advance for "quantum defense"—the cost being a significant decline in the overall network efficiency.

Sounds exaggerated? The data is here. Currently mainstream post-quantum cryptography schemes run 10 times slower than existing technologies, while the amount of data generated increases by 10 times. In other words, fully switching to quantum-resistant algorithms now would be equivalent to cutting the throughput of the blockchain by an entire order of magnitude. Transaction fees will skyrocket, network congestion will worsen, and there may even be a large number of nodes exiting due to excessively high maintenance costs.

In order to guard against a threat that may only emerge in ten years, we must now bear the cost of slower networks and skyrocketing expenses—can this cost be justified?

The key question is actually: "When to upgrade" rather than "Whether to upgrade". There is a reference standard worth noting - the timeline of the US Department of Defense DARPA's quantum program is to validate the feasibility of practical Quantum Computers before 2033. This means we have nearly a ten-year window. This time allows us to make smarter choices, rather than being forced to choose between "absolute security" and "usable networks".

What this reflects is a deeper issue within the entire Crypto Assets world: how to ensure that current networks are both stable and trustworthy, as well as secure and sustainable, while pursuing technological innovation? When security and efficiency conflict, how can a balance be found? The answers to these questions may test the industry's wisdom even more than Quantum Computing itself.