Recently studying Starknet’s post-quantum strategy, I find one issue particularly worth noting: If quantum computing ever truly threatens current cryptographic systems, what happens to ordinary users’ assets? Many might assume the solution is simply switching to a more secure signature algorithm. But the reality is far more complex. For ordinary users, what matters most isn’t which advanced cryptography underlies the system—it’s whether their assets remain usable, whether their wallet addresses change, and whether their past transaction histories and application interactions can be preserved. This is what makes Starknet particularly interesting: its accounts are smart contracts themselves, meaning the signature verification logic can be upgraded—理论上, users don’t need to migrate assets or create new addresses just to switch signature schemes. This design leaves significant room for future security upgrades. However, there’s another easily overlooked issue: technological upgrades don’t guarantee users will automatically complete them. Starknet itself acknowledges that accounts are user-self-custodied, and the network cannot unilaterally change users’ signature mechanisms. Users still need to proactively migrate—and must even plan ahead for contingency measures once quantum threats become real. Therefore, what I’m most eager to see Starknet address next are practical user-level challenges: how to lower the barrier to migration, how to prevent users from losing assets due to operational errors, and how to ensure a smooth transition for wallets and ecosystem applications. After all, no matter how advanced the security technology, if ordinary users can’t understand or use it effectively, it will never realize its true value. In the post-quantum era, the most competitive blockchains won’t just resist new threats—they’ll enable users to complete security upgrades with near-zero friction.