I couldn’t understand how that worked and for the longest time thought either I was really stupid, or the whole world had lost its mind promoting something that obviously could not be true.
It took a couple of years for me to realize that it simply wasn’t a “law” in the first place and to recognize differences in academic speak and popular media.
It's not that uncommon for new technologies to experience exponential improvement for some period of time. It doesn't seem like an unreasonable question to ask.
My gut feeling is that this question right now is like asking for Moore's Law in 1950.
The hard part is figuring out the best general engineering approach, i.e. what to make the qubits out of, how to entangle them, what materials to use. Once you figure that out and do small demonstration units I'd fully expect the right design to be scalable quickly. But the actual production of the right design should be less of a barrier.
Still a barrier, but nowhere near 50s levels.
To break contemporary public-key crypto you need quantum computers orders of magnitude larger than anything built so far. To break something like Curve25519 you need 1600 or so logical qubits.