Yeah, I’ve been thinking about that. A post‑quantum key exchange would add a layer of safety, but it also bumps up power consumption and silicon area—two things I try to keep minimal. I’d prefer a hybrid approach: keep the biometric data encrypted locally with a classical scheme that’s still solid, then use a lightweight lattice algorithm just for key exchange with the server. That way the watch stays efficient, and I avoid chasing the latest trend without solid proof it’ll stay useful for years. And honestly, if the device lasts a decade, we’ll still have to replace the battery and maybe the band, so investing heavily in a fancy quantum protocol might be overkill.

Sounds like a solid trade‑off, and I’ll keep an eye on the specs—no surprises in the power draw. If the proof works out, we’ll have a watch that actually outlives the hype cycle.

Got it—tight specs, tight code, no unnecessary bloat. I’ll keep the design lean and the testing rigorous; after all, a smartwatch that lasts longer than the trend is the only thing worth keeping.