Quantum computing has become one of the hottest topics lately, thanks to Google saying that a sufficiently powerful machine could exploit legacy blockchains with less firepower than initially estimated.

For XRP holders, a nuanced answer, based on expert takes, is that XRP’s architecture is better positioned than Bitcoin’s. XRP is the digital token operating on the XRP Ledger (XRPL), which is a open-source, decentralized blockchain. Ripple is a fintech company that co-founder this ledge.

Let’s discuss in detail, one step at a time.

The threat

Every major blockchain shares the same fundamental cryptographic features that include a private key, which is the secret password that you never share but use to sign and execute transactions on the distributed ledger.

For this, a public key is mathematically derived, and from that, your wallet address is generated, which you share with others to receive funds.

The quantum vulnerability that everyone is talking about is that a sufficiently powerful machine running the so-called Shor’s algorithm could theoretically reverse-engineer your private key from the exposed public key, draining your funds.

Typically, your public key is exposed to the network when you send a transaction, and when you receive funds, only your address is on-chain. This is why your account activity, whether you have sent funds, makes you quantum vulnerable, not your balance or how long you have held the address.

XRP’s exposure

This week, XRP Ledger’s validator Vet, ran a quantum vulnerability audit of the entire ledger and found that around 300,000 XRP accounts holding 2.4 billion XRP have never sent any funds. They have so far received only funds, meaning their public keys have never been exposed to the network.

These accounts are therefore quantum-safe by default.

However, there are dormant whale accounts that have transacted before and exposed their public keys, but this happened at least 5 years ago. They are essentially exposed and not active. If a quantum computer comes into existence tomorrow, these whales would be in trouble.

Vet found two such accounts on the entire XRP Ledger, and together they hold 21 million XRP. While that sounds a lot, it’s just 0.03% of the circulating supply.

Note that the vulnerability is based on the assumption that they are dormant and not around for “key rotation” – an XRPL feature that lets you swap your signing key without moving funds at all. Think of it this way: You can change the lock on your house (account) without having to move house. This way, your funds stay safe, no send transaction occurs, and anyone holding your old key is locked out of your account.

“The XRP Ledger is account based and allows for signing key rotation. so you can rotate keys that sign on behalf of an account without switching the account. this is obviously not a perfect solution at all and actual quantum resistant algorithms will eventuell be adopted,” Vet said on X.

Technically, this feature is available for everyone, but the problem arises when people are not around to use it – the so-called long dormant accounts, who may have lost keys, passed away, or simply aren’t paying attention. That is what makes them vulnerable.

Mayukha Vadari, staff software engineer at Ripple, pointed to the “escrow feature” as another defense against quantum risk.

He said that funds locked in escrow with a time lock are safe not because of cryptography, but because of logic — a time lock simply prevents withdrawal until a specified time has passed.

“Time locks aren’t hash based either, you just can’t get in until that time has passed (at least not via quantum – you’d need some other bug for that). Yeah that’s true, can’t stop a blackholing – but the attacker is less incentivized to do that because they don’t get the funds,” Vadari said.

How Bitcoin compares

The quantum threat to Bitcoin appears worse than that to XRP for two reasons.

First, the sheer scale. A significant portion of early bitcoin was mined using a format called P2PK, which exposed public keys directly in the transaction output – no spend transaction required. This includes Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1 million BTC, which has never moved. Broadly speaking, estimates of quantum-vulnerable dormant bitcoin range from 2.3 million BTC to as high as 7.8 million BTC. This represents between 11% and 37% of bitcoin’s circulating supply.

All of these are sitting ducks for a potential quantum attacker.

Even holders who recognize the threat and want to protect face a structural problem that XRP holders do not. That’s because Bitcoin’s blockchain lacks a key rotation feature, leaving holders with only one option: move funds to a new address whose public key has never been seen. Funds at that new address are quantum-safe.

However, when you move funds from old to new, the transaction sits in the memory pool (a temporary waiting room) for about 10 minutes. During this time, the public key of the old address is exposed. A sufficiently strong quantum machine can exploit this public key within ten minutes. This risk is still largely theoretical, but it points to bitcoin holders’ relative structural vulnerability.

That said, note that Bitcoin developers have already initiated several proposals to develop quantum resistance.

SEC chair Paul Atkins says “Project Crypto” means the SEC and CFTC are ready to implement the CLARITY Act as soon as Congress passes comprehensive market‑structure reforms.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman Paul Atkins has signaled that the agency considers itself operationally ready to implement the long‑discussed CLARITY Act, once Congress passes the underlying legislation. In a post on social media, Atkins said “the design goal of Project Crypto is that once Congress takes action, the SEC and CFTC will be ready to implement the CLARITY Act,” describing the work as a joint preparedness effort rather than a theoretical exercise. The comment suggests regulatory staff have already mapped out rulemaking, supervision, and enforcement workflows for a future in which digital assets sit under a clearer statutory framework.

Atkins explicitly aligned his remarks with Treasury, backing recent comments by Treasury Secretary Basant that “it’s time for Congress to plan for future regulatory safeguards and advance comprehensive market structure legislation to President Trump’s desk.” Framed together, the statements amount to a coordinated nudge from market regulators and Treasury: the bottleneck is now legislative, not administrative. The reference to “comprehensive market structure legislation” implies that CLARITY is being treated less as a narrow crypto bill and more as a broader rewrite of how digital assets, intermediaries, and trading venues are slotted into U.S. securities and commodities law.

CLARITY Act heading to Congress

For the crypto industry, the message cuts in two directions. On one side, a prepared SEC‑CFTC “Project Crypto” environment could bring long‑sought certainty on when tokens are treated as securities, which venues qualify as exchanges, and how custodians, brokers, and stablecoin issuers are supervised. On the other, a ready‑to‑deploy framework also means that once Congress acts, the implementation phase could move faster than some market participants expect, leaving less room to adjust business models mid‑stream. With both the SEC and Treasury now publicly stressing readiness and urging Congress to “plan for future regulatory safeguards,” the next move belongs to lawmakers – and the eventual shape of the CLARITY Act will determine whether this regulatory preparedness feels like relief or whiplash.

Elon Musk’s xAI is taking Colorado to court over a new set of regulations designed to govern artificial intelligence.

The lawsuit, filed in a US district court on Thursday, seeks to stop Senate Bill 24-205 from taking effect. This law was created to prevent “algorithmic discrimination” by AI in sensitive sectors such as housing, finance, and employment.

The legal challenge centers on the idea that the state is overstepping its bounds by influencing how AI models communicate. 

In the court filing, xAI claimed that “Colorado cannot alter xAI’s message simply because it wants to amplify its own views on the highly politicized subjects of fairness and equity.” The company also noted that the mandate would hinder its mission for Grok to be “maximally truth seeking.”

Legal representatives for xAI pointed out what they see as a contradiction in the bill, which is scheduled to start on June 30. They argued that the law actually encourages “differential treatment” under the guise of trying to “increase diversity or redress historical discrimination.”

Last December, xAI sued California over the Generative AI Training Data Transparency Act. In that case, the company argued that being forced to disclose data sources violates the First and Fifth Amendments by revealing trade secrets and compelling specific types of speech. 

Amidst these state-level fights, some federal officials are calling for a change in how the industry is managed. 

David Sacks, the White House AI czar and co-chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, has been vocal about the need for a national standard.

“The problem that we’re seeing right now is that you’ve got 50 different states regulating this in 50 different ways, and it’s creating a patchwork of regulation that’s difficult for innovators to comply with,” Sacks stated in late March.

President Donald Trump appointed Sacks as co-chair of the newly established President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology to help streamline these rules and prevent a fragmented legal landscape across the country.

Trump recently signed an executive order aimed at centralizing these policies, with the goal of “nationalizing AI policy in place of the current patchwork of state laws.” 

The administration has signaled that state-level mandates requiring AI to alter its output could be viewed as an obstruction to national interests and American leadership in the sector.

Bitcoin’s push past $73,000 quickly lost steam as the market shifted focus back to a shaky truce between the U.S. and Iran.

While a brief rally took place after rumors surfaced that Iran might accept Bitcoin as payment for cargo ships moving through the Strait of Hormuz, the excitement faded. Investors are now worried that geopolitical friction could undo the progress Bitcoin has made in the U.S. market recently.

Tensions flared when Iranian parliamentary speaker and former IRGC general Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf criticized the ongoing military actions in Lebanon. 

Ghalibaf, a key figure in the regime, warned that any “illegal entry” or “denial of uranium enrichment” would be seen as a move to “violate the ceasefire” and could trigger a larger conflict.

This instability pushed crude oil prices back up to $97 per barrel. Rising energy costs typically pull money away from speculative assets like crypto as investors become more cautious about risk. 

However, the pressure isn’t just coming from overseas; data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis showed that the core PCE index rose by 0.4% on Thursday. This suggests that inflation is stickier than expected, making it harder for the Federal Reserve to pivot.

Economic growth is also slowing down significantly. The fourth quarter GDP was revised down to a tiny 0.5% annualized rate, signaling that the economy is almost at a standstill. 

Usually, signs of stagnation lead traders to expect the government to step in with more liquidity, but this time, the data has sparked genuine fear. A lack of faith in the plan to avoid a recession has already softened the U.S. dollar against a basket of other major currencies.

Will Bitcoin price go up?

Currently, Bitcoin is stuck in an awkward spot between these two narratives. It is trying to find a clear path while being pulled by war headlines on one side and a possible economic crash on the other. This lack of direction is visible on the charts, as the price struggles to stay above $72,000.

For the rally to continue, Bitcoin needs to chew through a massive wall of selling pressure. There are roughly $6 billion in leveraged short positions sitting between $72,200 and $73,500. Even though yesterday’s rally cleared $427 million in these bets, the remaining sell orders are acting as a heavy lid on the price.

Bitcoin needs to firmly break $73,000 and turn that level into support before it can chase new highs. If it fails to clear this liquidity soon, traders may lose heart and start taking profits, which could easily send the price sliding back toward $68,000.

Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, xAI, has filed a lawsuit against the state of Colorado, seeking to block incoming AI rules that restrict speech from AI chatbots like Grok.

The AI company is specifically challenging Colorado’s Senate Bill 24-205, which aims to protect AI users from “algorithmic discrimination” in areas like employment, housing and finance. 

However, in a filing to a US district court in Colorado on Thursday, xAI argued that “Colorado cannot alter xAI’s message simply because it wants to amplify its own views on the highly politicized subjects of fairness and equity.”

The company further argued that the law, set to take effect on June 30, is contradictory as it promotes “differential treatment” in an effort to “increase diversity or redress historical discrimination.”

Forcing xAI to change Grok would also interfere with its goal of being “maximally truth seeking,” it said.

Colorado isn’t the first state that xAI has sued over AI regulations. In December, it sued California over its Generative AI Training Data Transparency Act, arguing that disclosure requirements compel speech and reveal trade secrets in violation of the First and Fifth Amendments.

Related: AI agents overwhelmingly prefer Bitcoin over fiat in new study

The Colorado and California AI laws come after accusations of Grok making racist, sexist and antisemitic comments in the past.

AI rules should be left to federal regulators: David Sacks

White House AI czar David Sacks has led a push for state regulators to steer clear of crafting AI rules, arguing for a single federal standard for AI instead of a “patchwork” of state laws.

“The problem that we’re seeing right now is that you’ve got 50 different states regulating this in 50 different ways, and it’s creating a patchwork of regulation that’s difficult for innovators to comply with,” Sacks said in late March.

Sacks was appointed as co-chair of the newly established President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology to address that issue.

Magazine: IronClaw rivals OpenClaw, Olas launches bots for Polymarket — AI Eye