quantum readiness is more complicated than replacing one signature algorithm. @Starknet has two interesting pieces here. its STARK proofs use hash-based cryptography to verify computation, while native account abstraction makes each account a programmable smart contract with its own signature validation logic. that second part matters because a new verifier can be introduced at the account level without forcing a network-wide protocol upgrade. existing accounts still need the right migration and wallet support, so flexibility doesn’t mean every wallet is protected by default. there’s also the Ethereum dependency to consider. Starknet is an L2, and components like KZG commitments mean its long-term cryptographic roadmap can’t be viewed in isolation from Ethereum’s own upgrades. quantum computing and potential AI-assisted mathematical breakthroughs are reasons to prepare, not reasons to predict a deadline. the real challenge is making sure each layer can evolve when its underlying assumptions change. the research and roadmap are here: https://t.co/5aRUgftoa5