“...The reality is, the future of computing will be a hybrid between classical computer of bits, A.I. systems and quantum computing coming together...
Well said, Dario – I should know...
Stared and listened so intently and long in this space, eyes still hurt and ears still ring...
But you’re on to something actionable...
If someone (like Jen-Hsun) said:
“...The reality is, the future of videogaming will be a hybrid between classical cinema, digital animation, and green-screen mashup...
Everyone’d nod their head...
But that future’s already here – H.265...
A compression standard that crosses so seamlessly into rendering and inclusion of clip art – folks’d better off to simply send the original filet...
Rather than grinding it into chop-meat and then re-shaping into a patty...
You all know this – you’ve been there:
https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/7379.wss
But – as usual – I digress...
Why folks worked so hard to make nanotubes work, while ignoring stacked 2D materials – I never quite got...
But you all will get there...
You’ve stepped into some big shoes...
https://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/15/us/chemistry-physics-nobels-hail-discoveries-life-superconductors-2-get-nobel-for.html
“...prize comes as a triumph for [IBM], whose Zurich research center has now won the Nobel Prize in Physics two years in a row: Last year, Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer won for the 1981 invention of the scanning tunneling electron microscope...
Godspeed on your way...
3
Quantum supremacy. The term sounds fascist, racist, and militaristic. The Luddite in me says that we might be better off computing with ones and zeroes, either or equations.
@Mr. B
A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet. What would you suggest they call it? Quantum Leap? Sorry, that one's taken. The scientist in me says the Luddite in you doesn't understand what any of this is really about anyway and you're probably frightened in general by anything "sciency" sounding. QC has the ability to really move mankind forward into a better age.
18
The first comprehensive book published about the NSA, The Puzzle Palace, claimed they try to be ten years ahead of the public state of the art.
So do they already have usable quantum computing? Are they reading at least a small, critical subset of Russia and China's mail?
7
I'm certainly no expert on quantum computing, but I think there's something not quite right with the explanation of qubit states, "Because each qubit represents two states at once...." The subsequent explanation is just as true of classical bits. One bit holds two possible numbers (0 or 1), two is four possible numbers (0,1,2,3), three is eight numbers (0-7). Just a quibble -- still an interesting article.
4
@Joe Meehan
For n devices both a classical and quantum computer have 2 to the nth power (2^n) states. However, the classical computer can only store one state at a time, while in the quantum computer, by the concept of linear superposition, all 2^n states are simultaneously present. These may represent the answer of 2^n calculations.
There is another misleading statement: "Most of modern technology, from transistors and lasers to the gadgets in our pockets, runs on this quantum weirdness." Quantum weirdness refers to what is generally known as the measurements problem and what is referred to as the particle-wave duality. These issues are irrelevant to the devices "in our pockets", which consist of many interacting particles and/or photons that are controlled by classical macroscopic means and at temperatures where weird phenomena, such as quantum entanglement and correlations are thermally disrupted and hence inconsequential. Quantum mechanics is nevertheless essential in defining the material properties of the devices and their response to external fields and forces.
27
When will Google innovate their customer service beyond the 1980s?
23
My guess is that this is a 'black swan'. Once there's one to be seen, assumptions about the world and what the future may bring can jump in directions that previously weren't credible. Most people's attention most of the time is occupied by what traditional computing has brought us at what seems like break-neck speed. In this way we have become like ancient Egypt which devoted its spare labor to building pyramids--to the exclusion of many other possibilities. The pressure to push our current version of pyramid building--digital/electronic phenomena--as far as it can be taken will be irresistible. If quantum computing crawls today, it will walk tomorrow, and fly the day after. I don't think anyone can really know what this will mean for the future.
8
It's not clear we will ever have working quantum computers. Some scientists feel that there is no way to get around the inherent noise, and in fact there is a mathematical proof of this. You might get a few qbits, but no more. So all this needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
10
At the risk of being called a Luddite, why would it be a good thing to speedily break encryption codes? Aren't they the gatekeepers preventing total loss of private and proprietary information?
12
@PaulB67 Because you could also transmit data via a quantum connection that can not be compromised. Also, there are incalculable real-life applications on having computers to do "things" geometrically much faster. But, a "personal quantum computers" is decades away, we may have a commercially viable mainframe type quantum computer by the middle of this century - at the earliest.
4
@Angel Perez great points, however, its doubtful there would ever be any personal quantum computers. Like today, I believe we will likely leverage cloud computing for everything (like we have for storage - Netflix, Stadia, Drive, etc.). With such a glut of computing power (should a quantum computer ever be realized), there would be no need to have one yourself.
@PaulB67 There exists a number of post-quantum encryption technologies. NIST has begun accepting proposals for the new public key standard. Existing asymmetric encryption technologies need increase their key size. AES goes from 128bits to 256 bits to ensure existing security guarantees.
The truth is, these machines will be developed whether losing existing public key technologies is worth it or not; either by national governments or well funded criminal enterprises. The transition to post quantum encryption is mandatory; there is economic incentive to break these technologies, so they will be broken if they can be. Better to have it done in the open so the benefits to chemistry, medicine, and engineering can be reaped by the common populace than hidden away in black budget programs by governments and criminal or terrorist organizations.
6
There have been many iterations of supercomputers after ENIAC. Now I carry the equivalent of a supercomputer with my SmartPhone. Quantum Computing is impressive. I have no doubt it will solve many problems that will affect my life. However I don't expect a Quantum PC in my lifetime. These new tools will be the domain of Schools, Corporations and Governments.The world is struggling to manage the power of the Internet and the computers that created it. I hope that we can use this new power to make the world a better place instead of helping to destroy it faster.
47