3. Why Starknet Must Consider Ethereum’s Quantum Resistance Timeline Quantum resistance is definitely complex!! (Since I find it difficult, my writing doesn’t come out as smoothly as I’d like. Sigh.) While reading through Starknet’s @Starknet documentation on quantum resistance, I noticed several key connections to Ethereum. Since Starknet currently operates as an L2, it’s obvious that simply changing its internal components won’t resolve all its dependencies. For example, Starknet relies on Ethereum’s KZG commitment when posting state data to Ethereum blobs. Although calldata is an alternative, other areas—such as bridges and messaging—still remain tightly coupled with Ethereum. Therefore, understanding Ethereum’s transition plan is essential to fully grasping Starknet’s position. Currently, the Ethereum Foundation is progressing with post-quantum transitions across its execution, consensus, and data layers, targeting 2029 as its goal. However, this timeline may shift depending on developments, and the full ecosystem transition could take even longer. ✔️ The key point is that the timing and method of Ethereum’s transition will directly influence Starknet’s own decisions. Considering these dependencies, it becomes clear why Starknet is exploring the possibility of becoming an independent L1. Recent updates show that the October community vote provided momentum for further research—but this was not a definitive decision to transition to L1. Rather, it was a step to evaluate technical conditions and potential impacts on users and developers. Looking ahead, we’ll need to observe who ultimately decides on security upgrades and what burdens the actual transition may impose. This could mark a pivotal new direction for Starknet if it ever moves toward becoming an L1.