After reading @drakefjustin ’s and @VitalikButerin 's takes, here are a few key points, along with my own thoughts: ■ AI is speeding up math research, which could challenge cryptographic assumptions sooner than expected. It’s worth planning ahead, calmly. ■ ECDSA and elliptic curves aren’t the only concern. Lattice-based systems like ML-DSA, Falcon, FHE and LWE could also face new risks. ■ Where possible, hash-based cryptography like WOTS and SPHINCS may be a stronger long-term option, since hashes have less mathematical structure to exploit. ■ Public-key encryption can’t rely on hashes alone, so it still needs structured systems. That means we may need larger keys and more conservative security parameters. ■ No need to panic or rush into moving funds. If it’s easy, using fresh addresses that have never signed a transaction is a sensible precaution. ■ Be careful with migrations: a botched move can cost more than a hack. ■ For multisig, off-chain confirmations can help keep signer signatures out of public view. ■ For privacy protocols, avoid putting encrypted notes on-chain when there’s a practical off-chain alternative. My take: the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. The risks deserve serious attention, but today’s warnings are still forecasts, not proof that these systems have been broken.