What if making a blockchain quantum-resistant means making every signature much bigger? That’s one of the challenges behind @tezos’ experimental tz5 account type on Quantumnet. Here’s the breakdown: 🔹The change: tz5 uses ML-DSA-44, a post-quantum digital signature scheme. 🔹The security: ML-DSA is based on different mathematical assumptions from the elliptic-curve cryptography used by many classical signatures. 🔹The trade-off: Post-quantum signatures are generally larger, increasing the data that transactions must carry. 🔹The test: Can Tezos strengthen its cryptographic defences without making transactions too costly or cumbersome? 👉 That’s why Quantumnet matters. It gives developers an experimental environment to test these trade-offs before considering changes to the mainnet. The real challenge isn’t just quantum resistance. It’s making it practical. Would you prioritise smaller signatures or stronger post-quantum security when designing a blockchain for the future?