Bitcoin’s long-term security is facing a new debate as artificial intelligence advances rapidly. Liron Shapira has argued that he is 50% confident Bitcoin could suffer a 50% or larger price crash within the next two years because AI may undermine security assumptions that investors have taken for granted.
The argument is not that AI can simply switch off Bitcoin or break its blockchain today. Instead, it raises a broader question about how quickly increasingly capable machines could discover vulnerabilities in software, cryptography and infrastructure that currently protect the network.
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin took the opposite position. He said he remains optimistic about cybersecurity over the long term and believes Bitcoin should be capable of handling network-layer problems through upgrades to clients, mining pools and other infrastructure without requiring changes to social consensus.
Why AI Has Become a Bitcoin Security Question
The concern deserves attention because AI systems are becoming increasingly capable at finding cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Recent developments show that advanced AI models can identify and exploit software weaknesses with less human involvement, demonstrating why security researchers are taking AI-assisted attacks seriously.
However, discovering software vulnerabilities is different from breaking Bitcoin’s fundamental cryptographic assumptions. Bitcoin relies on cryptographic signatures to establish ownership, while its proof-of-work system uses SHA-256. A successful attack against one layer would not automatically mean the entire network had failed.
This distinction is important when assessing Shapira’s 50% crash scenario. A serious vulnerability could damage confidence long before the Bitcoin protocol itself became mathematically broken. Markets price expectations, and the perception that Bitcoin is less secure than previously believed could potentially trigger selling even if developers eventually find a technical solution.
Related: Liquid Network Loses 4,000 BTC as $320 Million Peg-Out Triggers Emergency Halt
There are already examples of how this type of risk could emerge. Bitcoin faces a well-known long-term challenge from quantum computing, which could eventually threaten the elliptic-curve cryptography used for signatures. Google Quantum AI has warned that sufficiently powerful quantum computers could eventually break cryptographic systems protecting cryptocurrencies and has urged the industry to prepare for post-quantum migration.
AI and quantum computing should not be treated as the same threat. AI does not currently provide a known method for breaking Bitcoin’s core cryptography. Its more immediate relevance is in accelerating vulnerability discovery, automated attacks and security research. That could shorten the time developers have to respond when new weaknesses emerge.
Why Bitcoin’s Ability to Upgrade Matters
Buterin’s argument focuses on Bitcoin’s ability to respond. Network-layer vulnerabilities, for example, can potentially be addressed by upgrading software used by nodes, miners and other participants. His position is that not every security problem requires rewriting Bitcoin’s underlying economic rules.
Related: Ethereum Co-Founder Says AI Debate Is Missing the Biggest Question
The harder question is what happens if an attack reaches Bitcoin’s cryptographic foundations. That is where social consensus becomes important. Bitcoin has no central company or chief executive capable of ordering every participant to adopt a new security standard.
The quantum debate illustrates the problem. A 2026 draft proposal known as BIP-361 outlines a possible pathway toward post-quantum migration and the eventual retirement of vulnerable legacy signatures. It remains a draft rather than an adopted Bitcoin upgrade, showing how technically complicated and socially significant such changes can be.
Related: Bitcoin eCash and BIP-110 Explained: Understanding the Two Upcoming August Bitcoin Forks
That does not mean Bitcoin is defenseless. Developers, researchers and companies are already examining quantum-resistant approaches, while industry initiatives such as Galaxy’s Bitcoin Quantum Readiness Initiative are funding research and developer work aimed at strengthening Bitcoin against future cryptographic threats.
For investors, the central issue is therefore not whether AI will suddenly “break Bitcoin.” There is currently no evidence that it can. The more realistic question is whether AI accelerates the discovery of weaknesses faster than the decentralized Bitcoin ecosystem can coordinate fixes.
A 50% BTC crash caused specifically by AI remains a prediction rather than an established outcome. But the debate highlights something investors often overlook: Bitcoin’s value depends not only on mathematics and code, but also on confidence that developers and users can respond when technology changes.
That makes the coming years important for Bitcoin. If cybersecurity improves alongside AI capabilities and the network demonstrates that it can adapt to emerging threats, the security debate could ultimately strengthen confidence. If a major vulnerability emerges and the community struggles to coordinate a response, however, the market reaction could be far more severe than the original technical problem.
About The Author
