STRK stakers and delegators recently voted on a question: should @Starknet research becoming an independent post-quantum L1? The result: 93.52% of voting power backed "Yes, this should be researched," across 3,236 votes. But the poll was non-binding. A "yes" is support for research, not approval of a transition. Any real decision would need its own governance process. Why ask at all? As an L2, Starknet relies on external infrastructure for its bridge and data availability. The parts it controls more directly, like native account abstraction and the hash-based STARK proving layer, are where it can move on its own terms. That's not the same as finished. The Quantum Hub keeps each surface separate and labels what is still experimental. What I'll be watching: how the research draws the line between what Starknet can change itself and what still depends on others. "The StarkWare Quantum Hub assesses eight capabilities for changing cryptography. Counts reflect public evidence within its defined scope. Source and methodology, checked October 15th 2026." https://t.co/xVkF7ExJkM Discussion: https://t.co/uXFV9QWhiM Built to adapt, not a claim of quantum safety. @Starknet