Q3 is our shipping quarter.
If you want testnet/launch updates first, the waitlist is still open: https://qms.finance/
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
If you want testnet/launch updates first, the waitlist is still open: https://qms.finance/
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤3🔥2
Meet the people building QMS.
Rasmus Kirk Jakobsen is our Cryptography Engineer.
He recently completed a master's degree in computer science from Aarhus University, specializing in SNARKs (succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge) and formal software verification.
His thesis applied Halo2, a SNARK proving system, to proving correct execution in a blockchain setting — a practical use of zero-knowledge proof techniques with direct relevance to QMS' verification roadmap. He also holds a bachelor's degree in cryptography from the same institution.
Alongside his studies, he spent 3.5 years as a student software engineer at Concordium, working on smart contract tooling, SDK development in Rust, JavaScript, and .NET, and contributing to technical discussions on SNARK-based applications with the research team.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
Rasmus Kirk Jakobsen is our Cryptography Engineer.
He recently completed a master's degree in computer science from Aarhus University, specializing in SNARKs (succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge) and formal software verification.
His thesis applied Halo2, a SNARK proving system, to proving correct execution in a blockchain setting — a practical use of zero-knowledge proof techniques with direct relevance to QMS' verification roadmap. He also holds a bachelor's degree in cryptography from the same institution.
Alongside his studies, he spent 3.5 years as a student software engineer at Concordium, working on smart contract tooling, SDK development in Rust, JavaScript, and .NET, and contributing to technical discussions on SNARK-based applications with the research team.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤4
QMS Network Official
Meet the people building QMS. Rasmus Kirk Jakobsen is our Cryptography Engineer. He recently completed a master's degree in computer science from Aarhus University, specializing in SNARKs (succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge) and formal software…
Fun fact about Rasmus:
"I roll my own crypto." 🙂
"I roll my own crypto." 🙂
😁3❤2
Two things often get confused:
1. Post-quantum security: classical algorithms designed to resist quantum attack.
2. Quantum computing: actual quantum hardware running quantum algorithms.
QMS is built for both, on different timelines:
At launch: block production uses no public-key cryptography, and finality uses post-quantum signatures. Miners run classical hardware on optimization workloads.
As quantum hardware matures: the same network is designed to integrate quantum miners on the optimization problems they're built to solve.
The network is built so the security model and the hardware model can evolve independently.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
1. Post-quantum security: classical algorithms designed to resist quantum attack.
2. Quantum computing: actual quantum hardware running quantum algorithms.
QMS is built for both, on different timelines:
At launch: block production uses no public-key cryptography, and finality uses post-quantum signatures. Miners run classical hardware on optimization workloads.
As quantum hardware matures: the same network is designed to integrate quantum miners on the optimization problems they're built to solve.
The network is built so the security model and the hardware model can evolve independently.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤4👍2
The mining evolution QMS is designed for:
Phase 1: classical miners, classical optimization workloads.
Phase 2: hybrid systems, quantum-assisted on specific problems.
Phase 3: native quantum miners, a new work-proof framework is in development with academic partners.
The network stays the same as the hardware and verification evolve together.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
Phase 1: classical miners, classical optimization workloads.
Phase 2: hybrid systems, quantum-assisted on specific problems.
Phase 3: native quantum miners, a new work-proof framework is in development with academic partners.
The network stays the same as the hardware and verification evolve together.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤3👀3
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
This week, a preliminary quantum-algorithm claim put lattice cryptography under fresh scrutiny, while blockchains and infrastructure providers showed what post-quantum migration looks like in practice.
3 signals stood out:
1️⃣ New quantum result.
On 6 August, the Cryptology ePrint Archive posted a preprint from Daniel Simon, the AWS cryptographer behind Simon's algorithm. He claims a polynomial-time quantum algorithm for the Dihedral Coset Problem. That problem has sat under lattice cryptography for twenty years. Known reductions connect it to lattice problems and Learning With Errors, so if it falls, they weaken.
It has not been peer-reviewed, and no one has reproduced it yet. The result reaches high-noise LWE instances, not the parameters behind ML-KEM or ML-DSA. Nothing deployed is broken.
Those standards rest on a bet that these problems stay hard against quantum machines. Bets like that get revised. If a network can't swap a primitive when one breaks, it's stuck with the bet.
2️⃣ Sui and Bitcoin exposed two very different migration paths.
On 6 August, Sui announced plans to add lattice-based ML-DSA-65 for native accounts and hash-based SLH-DSA for high-value vaults. Users will be able to keep their recovery phrase and address, with vaults targeted for Mainnet in 2026 and native account authentication targeted for Q1 2027, subject to audits and Testnet feedback.
The same week, Blockstream Research published a survey of lattice signatures under Bitcoin’s constraints, including signature size, long-lived UTXOs, implementation complexity, and wallet derivation.
That's the design gap: crypto-agile networks can add new authorization paths, while retrofitting Bitcoin reaches across storage, wallets, and consensus.
3️⃣ Post-quantum standards moved closer to regulated and long-lived systems.
On 4 August, wolfSSL announced new PQC integration and evaluation paths covering ML-KEM, ML-DSA, and SLH-DSA, alongside Linux kernel, firmware TPM, secure networking, and satellite module work. Its satellite module is targeting FIPS 140-3 Level 3 validation; it is not yet Level 3 validated.
On 6 August, Oracle published a roadmap to bring ML-KEM, ML-DSA, and hybrid post-quantum TLS across supported Java LTS releases. The rollout is staged from JDK 25 in October 2026 through JDK 11 and 8 in the second half of 2027.
Standards become useful only when maintained runtimes, validated modules, and existing infrastructure can deploy them.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
3 signals stood out:
1️⃣ New quantum result.
On 6 August, the Cryptology ePrint Archive posted a preprint from Daniel Simon, the AWS cryptographer behind Simon's algorithm. He claims a polynomial-time quantum algorithm for the Dihedral Coset Problem. That problem has sat under lattice cryptography for twenty years. Known reductions connect it to lattice problems and Learning With Errors, so if it falls, they weaken.
It has not been peer-reviewed, and no one has reproduced it yet. The result reaches high-noise LWE instances, not the parameters behind ML-KEM or ML-DSA. Nothing deployed is broken.
Those standards rest on a bet that these problems stay hard against quantum machines. Bets like that get revised. If a network can't swap a primitive when one breaks, it's stuck with the bet.
2️⃣ Sui and Bitcoin exposed two very different migration paths.
On 6 August, Sui announced plans to add lattice-based ML-DSA-65 for native accounts and hash-based SLH-DSA for high-value vaults. Users will be able to keep their recovery phrase and address, with vaults targeted for Mainnet in 2026 and native account authentication targeted for Q1 2027, subject to audits and Testnet feedback.
The same week, Blockstream Research published a survey of lattice signatures under Bitcoin’s constraints, including signature size, long-lived UTXOs, implementation complexity, and wallet derivation.
That's the design gap: crypto-agile networks can add new authorization paths, while retrofitting Bitcoin reaches across storage, wallets, and consensus.
3️⃣ Post-quantum standards moved closer to regulated and long-lived systems.
On 4 August, wolfSSL announced new PQC integration and evaluation paths covering ML-KEM, ML-DSA, and SLH-DSA, alongside Linux kernel, firmware TPM, secure networking, and satellite module work. Its satellite module is targeting FIPS 140-3 Level 3 validation; it is not yet Level 3 validated.
On 6 August, Oracle published a roadmap to bring ML-KEM, ML-DSA, and hybrid post-quantum TLS across supported Java LTS releases. The rollout is staged from JDK 25 in October 2026 through JDK 11 and 8 in the second half of 2027.
Standards become useful only when maintained runtimes, validated modules, and existing infrastructure can deploy them.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤2
QMS Network Official
This week, a preliminary quantum-algorithm claim put lattice cryptography under fresh scrutiny, while blockchains and infrastructure providers showed what post-quantum migration looks like in practice. 3 signals stood out: 1️⃣ New quantum result. On 6 August…
The QMS takeaway:
QMS is built around this assumption: the next generation of blockchain infrastructure should be quantum-resistant by design, crypto-agile when assumptions change, and capable of turning network compute into useful work.
QMS is built around this assumption: the next generation of blockchain infrastructure should be quantum-resistant by design, crypto-agile when assumptions change, and capable of turning network compute into useful work.
❤2
Electricity powered the 20th-century economy.
The internet powers the 21st.
The next layer is compute you can buy without trusting the seller: verifiable, priced, accessible.
Blockchain's contribution is the rails, and the compute comes from the miners.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
The internet powers the 21st.
The next layer is compute you can buy without trusting the seller: verifiable, priced, accessible.
Blockchain's contribution is the rails, and the compute comes from the miners.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤3🔥3
What Real-World Problems Can QMS Solve?
Every business runs hard decisions on repeat. Which assets to hold, where to place collateral, which stops each truck covers, who works which shift. Too many combinations to check by hand, and every pick changes how good the rest are.
These are optimization problems, and enterprises already pay optimization vendors to handle them. QMS turns that into a marketplace. A client posts the problem, sets what a good answer is worth, and locks the reward. Every solution that meets the criteria gets paid — miners get their second income stream, and clients only pay for answers they can actually use.
The launch problem class, QUBO, is the same format quantum annealers and QAOA machines were built to read. Classical solvers do the work today. Quantum hardware competes for the same payments as it improves, with nothing in the protocol needing to change.
This article covers:
→ The everyday business decisions that fit the QMS marketplace — portfolio, collateral, routing, scheduling, resource assignment
→ Why QUBO is the launch problem class — one format that covers all 21 of Karp's NP-complete problems
→ The client workflow in six parts — how a portfolio job goes from filled-in form to on-chain settlement
→ The six tests a use case has to clear before a hard decision can be bought and sold as computing work
Portfolio optimization clears all six. So do routing and scheduling. Demand for exactly this kind of search is already growing — D-Wave's annealing systems saw 314% YoY usage growth in 2026, across 100+ organizations in industry, government, and research.
Read the full piece here: https://qms.finance/news/what-real-world-problems-can-qms-solve
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
Every business runs hard decisions on repeat. Which assets to hold, where to place collateral, which stops each truck covers, who works which shift. Too many combinations to check by hand, and every pick changes how good the rest are.
These are optimization problems, and enterprises already pay optimization vendors to handle them. QMS turns that into a marketplace. A client posts the problem, sets what a good answer is worth, and locks the reward. Every solution that meets the criteria gets paid — miners get their second income stream, and clients only pay for answers they can actually use.
The launch problem class, QUBO, is the same format quantum annealers and QAOA machines were built to read. Classical solvers do the work today. Quantum hardware competes for the same payments as it improves, with nothing in the protocol needing to change.
This article covers:
→ The everyday business decisions that fit the QMS marketplace — portfolio, collateral, routing, scheduling, resource assignment
→ Why QUBO is the launch problem class — one format that covers all 21 of Karp's NP-complete problems
→ The client workflow in six parts — how a portfolio job goes from filled-in form to on-chain settlement
→ The six tests a use case has to clear before a hard decision can be bought and sold as computing work
Portfolio optimization clears all six. So do routing and scheduling. Demand for exactly this kind of search is already growing — D-Wave's annealing systems saw 314% YoY usage growth in 2026, across 100+ organizations in industry, government, and research.
Read the full piece here: https://qms.finance/news/what-real-world-problems-can-qms-solve
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤3🤓3🔥2
QMS Network Official
What Real-World Problems Can QMS Solve? Every business runs hard decisions on repeat. Which assets to hold, where to place collateral, which stops each truck covers, who works which shift. Too many combinations to check by hand, and every pick changes how…
Picking 8 tokens out of 60 sounds simple, but it isn't, because there are over 2 billion ways to do it, and every pick changes how risky the others are.
QMS pays miners to run that search: the fund sets the bar, and the chain pays whoever clears it. This is just one example, full piece here 👆
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
QMS pays miners to run that search: the fund sets the bar, and the chain pays whoever clears it. This is just one example, full piece here 👆
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
👍2
Blockchains have spent 17yrs coordinating value: tokens, money, settlement, ownership.
Compute markets have spent 20yrs coordinating work: pricing CPUs, scheduling jobs, routing capacity. Mostly inside a handful of clouds.
The convergence happens when computation itself becomes a thing that can be priced, proven, settled, and paid for on-chain. Three of those four exist today: onchain markets already price, settle, and pay for compute. Almost entirely capacity. Rent the machine, trust what comes back.
The missing verb is proven. Verification cheap enough to settle against the result, not the rental. Close that gap and "decentralized cloud" stops being a marketing phrase and becomes a market with the same shape as DeFi.
That's the bet behind QMS. The same work that secures the chain can be sold to clients: one computation, both jobs.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
Compute markets have spent 20yrs coordinating work: pricing CPUs, scheduling jobs, routing capacity. Mostly inside a handful of clouds.
The convergence happens when computation itself becomes a thing that can be priced, proven, settled, and paid for on-chain. Three of those four exist today: onchain markets already price, settle, and pay for compute. Almost entirely capacity. Rent the machine, trust what comes back.
The missing verb is proven. Verification cheap enough to settle against the result, not the rental. Close that gap and "decentralized cloud" stops being a marketing phrase and becomes a market with the same shape as DeFi.
That's the bet behind QMS. The same work that secures the chain can be sold to clients: one computation, both jobs.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤🔥3
Meet the people building QMS.
Alessio Onori is our Lead Site Reliability Engineer.
He brings over seven years of experience managing production infrastructure end to end, with particular expertise in blockchain systems. He holds a bachelor’s degree in computer engineering and a postgraduate master’s in cybersecurity from the University of Bologna, as well as a master’s degree in computer science and engineering from the Polytechnic University of Milan.
At Swisscom Blockchain, Alessio built a custom Kubernetes operator and automation tooling for networks including Polkadot, Bitcoin, and Ethereum. He then spent five years at the Web3 Foundation, where he managed production Kubernetes infrastructure across multiple cloud providers, supporting blockchain RPC and validator nodes alongside core platform services.
During that time, he introduced GitOps-based CI/CD practices and reusable infrastructure-as-code modules, strengthened disaster recovery processes, and formalized production-readiness standards across the organization.
Alessio joined QMS Network in June 2026. He leads the infrastructure and observability underpinning the network, from node operations and platform reliability to monitoring and incident response.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
Alessio Onori is our Lead Site Reliability Engineer.
He brings over seven years of experience managing production infrastructure end to end, with particular expertise in blockchain systems. He holds a bachelor’s degree in computer engineering and a postgraduate master’s in cybersecurity from the University of Bologna, as well as a master’s degree in computer science and engineering from the Polytechnic University of Milan.
At Swisscom Blockchain, Alessio built a custom Kubernetes operator and automation tooling for networks including Polkadot, Bitcoin, and Ethereum. He then spent five years at the Web3 Foundation, where he managed production Kubernetes infrastructure across multiple cloud providers, supporting blockchain RPC and validator nodes alongside core platform services.
During that time, he introduced GitOps-based CI/CD practices and reusable infrastructure-as-code modules, strengthened disaster recovery processes, and formalized production-readiness standards across the organization.
Alessio joined QMS Network in June 2026. He leads the infrastructure and observability underpinning the network, from node operations and platform reliability to monitoring and incident response.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤2
QMS Network Official
Meet the people building QMS. Alessio Onori is our Lead Site Reliability Engineer. He brings over seven years of experience managing production infrastructure end to end, with particular expertise in blockchain systems. He holds a bachelor’s degree in computer…
Alessio is also a foodie! His fun fact: “I often choose where to travel next based on what I want to eat.”
😁2
In late May we wrote about Q-Day.
Since then: resource estimates for breaking secp256k1 already sit far below older models. Federal PQC deadlines hardened. Regulated finance kept migrating under multi-year plans. Live chains are still early on multi-year retrofits across wallets, validators, bridges, and dormant keys.
The open question is how much runway is left and how hard migration gets on a live network.
QMS is built on the cleaner path: quantum-resistant by design, with useful work that turns quantum hardware into an asset for the network.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
Since then: resource estimates for breaking secp256k1 already sit far below older models. Federal PQC deadlines hardened. Regulated finance kept migrating under multi-year plans. Live chains are still early on multi-year retrofits across wallets, validators, bridges, and dormant keys.
The open question is how much runway is left and how hard migration gets on a live network.
QMS is built on the cleaner path: quantum-resistant by design, with useful work that turns quantum hardware into an asset for the network.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
👍3
Hard to solve but cheap to check is the whole game for open compute markets.
If finding the answer takes real work, and verifying it is cheap, payment can follow the result instead of the seller’s claim.
That’s the market PoUW (Proof of Useful Work) can actually run on.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
If finding the answer takes real work, and verifying it is cheap, payment can follow the result instead of the seller’s claim.
That’s the market PoUW (Proof of Useful Work) can actually run on.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
👍4
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
This week, researchers formally showed that a much-discussed quantum algorithm does not work as claimed. Separately, Justin Drake said the Ethereum Foundation is moving L1 away from Poseidon toward SHA or BLAKE:
1️⃣ A proposed quantum shortcut for a hard lattice-related problem does not work.
Earlier this month, Daniel Simon proposed a quantum algorithm that he said could efficiently solve the Dihedral Coset Problem. Because that problem is connected to hard lattice problems through a known mathematical reduction, a working algorithm could have challenged security assumptions behind lattice-based cryptography.
On Aug 15, Aparna Gupte (MIT), Seyoon Ragavan (Google/MIT), and Mark Zhandry (Google/Stanford) posted IACR ePrint 2026/1693.
They show that Simon’s algorithm cannot reliably recover the secret bit it needs. Their result also covers a broader class of related approaches that discard too much information during the computation. The authors released a Lean 4 formalization alongside the paper.
2️⃣ Ethereum’s post-quantum direction is changing, but the implementation is not settled.
On Aug 13, Justin Drake said the Ethereum Foundation is abandoning Poseidon for L1 and pivoting to SHA or BLAKE. In practical terms, EF researchers are moving away from a hash designed for efficient zero-knowledge proofs toward more established conventional hashes.
At ACDE #243 that day, EIP-8355 was presented for possible inclusion in Hegotá. It would give smart contracts a built-in way to verify ML-DSA, a standardized post-quantum signature scheme. The draft and its proposed addition to Hegotá’s official candidate list are still open.
Developers also have not settled how to bring features such as key rotation and alternative signature schemes directly into Ethereum accounts. Frames, proposed in EIP-8141, is the current placeholder being considered for Hegotá. EIP-8130 has been raised as an alternative that could work across existing EVM chains without requiring the same protocol changes.
The direction is becoming clearer, but none of these changes has been finalized or shipped.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
1️⃣ A proposed quantum shortcut for a hard lattice-related problem does not work.
Earlier this month, Daniel Simon proposed a quantum algorithm that he said could efficiently solve the Dihedral Coset Problem. Because that problem is connected to hard lattice problems through a known mathematical reduction, a working algorithm could have challenged security assumptions behind lattice-based cryptography.
On Aug 15, Aparna Gupte (MIT), Seyoon Ragavan (Google/MIT), and Mark Zhandry (Google/Stanford) posted IACR ePrint 2026/1693.
They show that Simon’s algorithm cannot reliably recover the secret bit it needs. Their result also covers a broader class of related approaches that discard too much information during the computation. The authors released a Lean 4 formalization alongside the paper.
2️⃣ Ethereum’s post-quantum direction is changing, but the implementation is not settled.
On Aug 13, Justin Drake said the Ethereum Foundation is abandoning Poseidon for L1 and pivoting to SHA or BLAKE. In practical terms, EF researchers are moving away from a hash designed for efficient zero-knowledge proofs toward more established conventional hashes.
At ACDE #243 that day, EIP-8355 was presented for possible inclusion in Hegotá. It would give smart contracts a built-in way to verify ML-DSA, a standardized post-quantum signature scheme. The draft and its proposed addition to Hegotá’s official candidate list are still open.
Developers also have not settled how to bring features such as key rotation and alternative signature schemes directly into Ethereum accounts. Frames, proposed in EIP-8141, is the current placeholder being considered for Hegotá. EIP-8130 has been raised as an alternative that could work across existing EVM chains without requiring the same protocol changes.
The direction is becoming clearer, but none of these changes has been finalized or shipped.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
👍4🔥3
The bigger opportunity in decentralized compute is a market for answers.
A client should be able to post an optimization problem, define a qualifying result and pay whoever finds one, without choosing a provider first.
That is the market QMS is designed to build.
Miners run the solvers. The protocol verifies the work. Payment follows a qualifying solution. The same solver run also gives the miner chances to produce a block.
Useful computation becomes something an open network can price, verify and settle.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
A client should be able to post an optimization problem, define a qualifying result and pay whoever finds one, without choosing a provider first.
That is the market QMS is designed to build.
Miners run the solvers. The protocol verifies the work. Payment follows a qualifying solution. The same solver run also gives the miner chances to produce a block.
Useful computation becomes something an open network can price, verify and settle.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
🔥5👍2
AI has made compute capacity a strategic bottleneck. Microsoft expects its infrastructure to remain constrained through 2026 even as it adds more GPU, CPU and storage capacity.
More supply matters, so does choosing the right work.
QMS is built for optimization jobs where public verification and onchain settlement add value: constrained portfolios, combinatorial auctions and other problems with objective scoring. The buyer gets a result the market can check and settle against.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
More supply matters, so does choosing the right work.
QMS is built for optimization jobs where public verification and onchain settlement add value: constrained portfolios, combinatorial auctions and other problems with objective scoring. The buyer gets a result the market can check and settle against.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤4
🟪🟪🟪⬛️🟪🟪🟪
🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪
🟪🟪⬛️⬛️⬛️🟪🟪
⬛️🟪⬛️🧑🍳⬛️🟪⬛️
🟪🟪⬛️⬛️⬛️🟪🟪
🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪
🟪🟪🟪⬛️🟪🟪🟪
Team’s cooking. Looking forward to next week.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪
🟪🟪⬛️⬛️⬛️🟪🟪
⬛️🟪⬛️🧑🍳⬛️🟪⬛️
🟪🟪⬛️⬛️⬛️🟪🟪
🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪
🟪🟪🟪⬛️🟪🟪🟪
Team’s cooking. Looking forward to next week.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤4⚡2🔥2
QMS is designed to turn useful optimization into the work that secures the network.
The same solver run can compete for a block and produce a result a client is willing to pay for.
One computation creates two revenue paths and links miner incentives to commercial demand.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
The same solver run can compete for a block and produce a result a client is willing to pay for.
One computation creates two revenue paths and links miner incentives to commercial demand.
Original Tweet
X | LinkedIn | Medium | Docs
❤3