Bitcoin’s quantum dilemma: Bigger blocks or STARK proofs?
ZK STARKs are presented as the most practical way to make Bitcoin quantum-safe without sacrificing scalability. Post-quantum signature schemes approved by NIST are much larger than ECDSA/Schnorr, which could sharply reduce Bitcoin’s throughput. ZK STARK aggregation could compress many large signatures into one small proof, potentially even making blocks smaller than today and preserving decentralization. A block-size increase is the main alternative, but it would force every node to process and store much more data, raising centralization concerns and reviving old governance fights. Blockstream has tested hash-based post-quantum schemes like SHRINCS/SHRIMPS, but they still create large overhead. The main barrier is not cryptography but Bitcoin governance and script limitations. Proposed paths include re-enabling OP_CAT, adding STARK-specific opcodes, or using schemes like BitZip/CISA. The view is that Bitcoin could adopt STARKs, but likely not soon; consensus-layer changes may be a 2030s issue.
