14 ms·
Amazon Braket – Get Started with Quantum Computing
- ksnieck 7y agoWhat happens to the information from your explorations and experiments?
- sputknick 7y agoFrom the FAQ it looks like it will be dumped into an S3 bucket
- eduren 7y agoInteresting choice for the name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bra%E2%80%93ket_notation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bra%E2%80%93ket_notation
- teknopurge 7y agoI thought the same. Good job product marketing.
- fullstop 7y agoFrom appwiz's link in this thread: Amazon Braket – A fully managed service that allows scientists, researchers, and developers to begin experimenting with computers from multiple quantum hardware providers in a single place. Bra-ket notation is commonly used to denote quantum mechanical states, and inspired the name of the service.
- bentcorner 7y agoI was thinking that this name would make hallway conversations tougher (no, it's bracket with the "c"), but I'm guessing (and it's just a guess, I know nothing about this field) that the people actually interested in this service know what braket means.
- ajkjk 7y agoThey certainly would. Also, bra-ket would be pronounced "brocket", rather than "bracket".
- appwiz 7y agoJeff Barr's post - https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-braket-get-started-with-quantum-computing/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-braket-get-started-w...
- dang 7y agoThat seems to have more information, so we've switched to it from https://aws.amazon.com/braket/ https://aws.amazon.com/braket/.
- anon1m0us 7y agoAcknowledging my very primitive understanding of quantum computing, would it be possible to simulate quantum computing?
- jcims 7y agoYes. Slowly.
- dshields1 7y agoYes. Right now simulators tend to be faster, cheaper, and more accurate than real quantum computers.
- jnevelson 7y agoHow can a simulation be more accurate than what it's simulating?
- LegitShady 7y agoI think he means returns correct results to known problems more reliably.
- jeeceebees 7y agoAs far as I understand, it's because what it's simulating is a logical qubit which is different from the very noisy, almost instantaneously collapsing physical qubits present in current quantum computers. Software simulates what's supposed to happen while the hardware only approaches it through many repeated trials.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- dshields1 7y agoCurrent quantum computers are noisy. Gates aren’t perfectly implemented. Qubits are prone to dephasing and decoherence.
- Jtsummers 7y ago
- dvt 7y agoVery cool, looks like they'll actually let you run stuff on real quantum hardware[1]! Of course, the hard part is building algorithms that take advantage of that kind of hardware. I must've read a dozen papers on Shor's algorithm and my understanding still leaves a lot to be desired. [1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-braket-get-started-with-quantum-computing/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-braket-get-started-w...
- 52-6F-62 7y agoCompletely tangential, but on the subject of the actual quantum hardware: I swear that if our entire civilization went under and some future archeologist found this: https://media.amazonwebservices.com/blog/2019/qc_rigetti_400_1.jpg https://media.amazonwebservices.com/blog/2019/qc_rigetti_400... They'd surely assume [at least at first] it was a religious artifact (and they'd only be half wrong?).
- jsty 7y agoThat pattern reminds me quite strikingly of aboriginal art
- perl4ever 7y agoThe part that would be particularly interesting to me, without context, would be the deviations from symmetry. At first glance, the holes around the white circles look pretty regular. But the sparser lines of holes in between do not match each other, particularly the upper right.
- dekhn 7y agohttps://www.amazon.com/Motel-Mysteries-David-Macaulay/dp/0395284252 https://www.amazon.com/Motel-Mysteries-David-Macaulay/dp/039... (specifically, the section on excavating the bathroom).
- archgoon 7y agoI'm pretty sure the hard part is still actually building said computers to run on.
- hacker322234 7y agoAre there any quantum programming tutorials to get started with this stuff?
- dshields1 7y agoI like the Qiskit community textbook: https://community.qiskit.org/textbook/ https://community.qiskit.org/textbook/
- Pandabob 7y agoAndy Matuschak and Michael Nielssen have a pretty interesting tutorial online about Quantum Computing https://quantum.country/qcvc https://quantum.country/qcvc
- nestorD 7y agoI can recommend it, it is a great primer on the subject.
- SBArbeit 7y agoYes. Microsoft has the Quantum Development Kit [1], with its language Q# (written in F#, actually), which comes with a local simulator. They also have the Q# Katas [2] for practice. On my 16GB RAM laptop, I can simulate 29 qubits. [1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/quantum/development-kit https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/quantum/development-kit [2]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/quantum/intro-to-katas?view=qsharp-preview https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/quantum/intro-to-katas?view...
- boothby 7y agoDisclosure, I'm a D-Wave employee; we're one of the hardware vendors. Here's a handful of resources: an introduction to our software stack [1], the SDK [2], a repository of demos [3]; a webinar [4]; and if you're willing to sign up for a free minute of QPU time (using our cloud service directly rather than AWS), there's some live demos and interactive Jupyter notebooks on the Leap service [5]. [1] https://docs.ocean.dwavesys.com/en/latest/getting_started.html#gs https://docs.ocean.dwavesys.com/en/latest/getting_started.ht... [2] https://github.com/dwavesystems/dwave-ocean-sdk https://github.com/dwavesystems/dwave-ocean-sdk [3] https://github.com/dwavesystems/demos https://github.com/dwavesystems/demos [4] https://dwavesys.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_WRHBYy1eQB-20oTkENhzLQ https://dwavesys.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_WRHBYy1eQB-20oT... [5] https://cloud.dwavesys.com/ https://cloud.dwavesys.com/
- BenoitP 7y agoThe shiny apparatus surrounding the hardware makes me think of The Talk, by smbc comics: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3
- blt 7y agoThis is awesome. I didn't see any mention of how much real quantum hardware is available. I guess it must be extremely expensive, or else they would quickly become unavailable due to curious people tinkering. (Also, how do you know that they are actually running your code on quantum hardware instead of a simulation?)
- peterwoerner 7y agoThere are simulation codes, but IBM makes their old machines publicly available. I wish I had time to look it up for you, but if you are interested that should give you a lead.
- dghughes 7y ago>I guess it must be extremely expensive Any quantum computing hardware I see is covered in gold, so I'd say yes.
- core-questions 7y agoIt stands to reason that the D-Wave offering will be running on real hardware, since you can sign up to run stuff on a D-Wave directly from their own site already.
- welder 7y agoCompetition: https://www.rigetti.com/ https://www.rigetti.com/
- FanaHOVA 7y agoFunny that their homepage says "Rigetti Quantum Computers Are Now Available On AWS" :)
- dmix 7y agoRigetti is one of the 3 hardware providers for Amazon Braket, along with D-Wave and IonQ https://aws.amazon.com/braket/hardware-providers/ https://aws.amazon.com/braket/hardware-providers/
- bobobooey 7y agoGet ready for my start up LightningBolt. It has Quantum Computers available on Rigetti.
- vtomole 7y ago> This new service is designed to let you get some hands-on experience with qubits and quantum circuits. Lots of open-source libraries do this[0]. Is Amazon Bracket going to be open-source? [0]: https://github.com/desireevl/awesome-quantum-computing#development-tools https://github.com/desireevl/awesome-quantum-computing#devel...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- marcinzm 7y agoAmazon Bracket seems to allow you to run on actual quantum hardware which I’m guessing is the difficult bit rather than the software.
- vtomole 7y agoI was asking if the software that allows one to program a quantum computer is going to be open-source. Pyquil and Qiskit allow you to run on actual quantum hardware and they are open-source.
- marcinzm 7y agoMy point is that if Amazon is providing the hardware then that's the selling point since quantum hardware is I'm guessing not easy to get a hold of.
- vtomole 7y agoIf quantum hardware is the selling point, I'm trying to understand the gain in keeping their SDK closed (If that is what they plan on doing).
- kortilla 7y agoTo lock you in as a measure to protect their revenue if another company offers quantum hardware as a service. The last thing amazon wants in any of its aas solutions is compatibility with competitors.
- cryptozeus 7y agoThis is exciting and anxiety provoking at the same time. Just when I am starting to grasp the inner workings of cloud / kubernetes infrastructures, this is on the horizon. What a world we are in !
- bamboozled 7y agoWhat does this have to do with Kubernetes? You should read the article.
- cryptozeus 7y agoYou should read my comment again.
- legitster 7y ago> Taken together, I think it is safe to say that most organizations will never own a quantum computer, and will find the cloud-based on-demand model a better fit. It may well be the case that production-scale quantum computers are the first cloud-only technology. There was a magical moment when an automobile went from being a gimmicky horse replacement to an actual innovation. I feel like this is a possible glimpse at something similar for the cloud.
- filoleg 7y agoI think the trend is reversed here. A lot of things are moving away from personal on-device computing to cloud, so it makes sense that for quantum we can jump straight to cloud, especially considering both the cost and practicality. Like, I don't remember any major trend in computing moving in the opposite direction in the past 10 years.
- jostmey 7y agoSo quantum computing is expected to based on Bra-ket notation? In that case, is it simply based on linear algebra and statistical sampling? I assume you can get that experience with low-level Tensorflow and a GPU for parallel computing
- randomsearch 7y agoYes, quantum computing is mostly linear algebra.
- archgoon 7y ago> So quantum computing is expected to based on Bra-ket notation? In that case, is it simply based on linear algebra and statistical sampling? Yes. You can simulate a 53 qubit quantum computer with a 2^53 complexed valued vector as input (about 20 petabytes), and a 2^53 x 2^53 complex valued unitary matrix, which will take about a trillion exabytes to represent exactly. However, that is for a generic quantum operation on all 53 qubits, and some programs can be represented significantly more compactly. > I assume you can get that experience with low-level Tensorflow and a GPU for parallel computing. No. Most GPUs have at most about 13 gigabytes of onboard memory and would not be able to hold the matrix in memory. Also, GPUs still do not reduce the computational complexity of matrix multiplication, you still have to perform the full ~ n^2.37 operations (using Coppersmith-Winograd). Though again, this is for a general Unitary transformation; reductions can sometimes be made; this is how IBM was able to validate result computed by Google. However, yes, this does mean that you can simulate a smaller quantum computer using just linear algebra and no particularly fancy tricks.
- CodeWriter23 7y agoSerious question: does this mean any developer with a credit card can now break our strongest crypto?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- dshields1 7y agoNo. We’re still a long way from quantum computers powerful enough for that.
- randomsearch 7y agoIndeed. We currently have machines with ~ 50 qubits and we’d need likely 10s of millions of qubits.
- archgoon 7y agoNo. Even if Amazon had worked out an agreement with Google to run arbitrary algorithms on a 53 qubit computer; that would not be enough to run Shors algorithm (which only breaks RSA and Elliptic Curve) on normal keys. This is also pretending that Google's 53 qubit computer were full, error corrected, logical qubits.
- ipnon 7y agoThere is no evidence of quantum computers breaking ciphers en masse.
- kortilla 7y agoNo, and there’s no evidence so far that anyone on the planet has a quantum computer capable of running shors algorithm in any useful capacity,
- Pokepokalypse 7y ago. . . because if they had the necessary hardware, and expertise, they'd totally be dumb enough to leak evidence.
- Upvoter33 7y agoAmazon seems to have missed the in-house opportunity to build quantum, so are partnering widely. It'll be interesting to see how Google squanders their tech lead in this space too...
- brookhaven_dude 7y agoAre there any quantum simulating frameworks that I can download on my high performance gaming PC and start playing with simple quantum programs?
- sixdimensional 7y agoDoes anyone else feel that quantum computing via the cloud is sort of the penultimate test of the "-aaS" (as a service) model? I mean, quantum computing is something that today seems unlikely to be widely available or achievable in hardware to anyone but a handful of specialists and companies/organizations. I wonder if someday, in the future, people will look back and see that classical computing spread because it was made accessible and ubiquitous, and we did not have the lust for centralization which we seem to now. I wonder what kind of future this spells for quantum computing - will it continue to spread or will it be limited/stunted by being controlled by only the few? This feels like it has the potential to be the ultimate kind of lock-in. If the way that the system and the hardware/software is exposed to the world is through cloud services, and the knowledge of how to build/operate/use quantum computers stays locked-in to only the privileged who can afford to have access to and utilize it... Imagine if you started building on quantum computing technology, but then decided you wanted to change.. to what other option!? I'm not trying to be a Luddite here, I think it's pretty amazing you can even access a quantum computer as a service. But, I am being "that person" who asks the question.. "hmm, where is this going"?
- jshaqaw 7y agoHard to say. In 1960 classical computing would have seemed totally centralized and unattainable in distributed form for the masses. Who knows what the future may bring for quantum computing assuming there is actually a Conventional use case for the masses (most people probably don’t have a burning urge to factor primes at home like say playing video games).
- sixdimensional 7y agoI agree. I'm trying to see this through that perspective when we were at that point in the cycle where everything was centralized. I'm wondering if there will ever be a time (or even a reason) for things to go back the other way again. Also, agreed about the use case - sometimes I get the feeling that quantum computing is a problem looking for a solution (but I am sure that must not be the case). That said, I think things are partially that way because quantum computing is just such a different paradigm, so to truly take advantage of it takes a pivot in thinking, but that great dividends may be possible as a result. My thought is, it's kind of like how we learned about what FPGAs could do. Different paradigm, incredible opportunity.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- stevespang 7y agoOne thing Barr very coincidentally failed to mention is what Amazon is charging for time on this quantum computer.
- tdhttt 7y agoSummary: + Amazon didn't build any quantum devices.[0] + AWS provides a software stack called Braket. [0] + AWS provides classical simulation or access to quantum computers from D-Wave, IonQ, and Rigetti.[0] + Many companies (e.g. IBM, Rigetti) have already provided similar software stack/cloud quantum devices. For a more comprehensive listing, please see [1]. [0]: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-braket-get-started-with-quantum-computing/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-braket-get-started-w... [1]: https://qbnets.wordpress.com/2019/11/23/list-of-quantum-clouds/ https://qbnets.wordpress.com/2019/11/23/list-of-quantum-clou...
- LeftHandPath 7y agoI would enthusiastically recommend IBM Q [0] and the command-line variant of Hello Quantum [1] to anyone who wants to investigate quantum circuits. If you start googling (or searching with your engine of choice) about Quantum Logic Gates, Bell States, et c., you'll pick up the basic concepts pretty quickly. Then you can follow the rabbit hole from there. [0]: https://quantum-computing.ibm.com https://quantum-computing.ibm.com [1]: https://www.pythonanywhere.com/gists/a5d885816f7dc042a78df11ce6cf9652/main.py/ipython3/ https://www.pythonanywhere.com/gists/a5d885816f7dc042a78df11...
- cgb223 7y agoAre these quantum computers currently powerful enough to tackle things like breaking non-quantum proof encryption?
- fhfhdhdbdjx 7y agoShort answer is no. Longer answer requires understanding quantum error correction and how long before we get quantum computers with 1000s of qubits.
- sampo 7y agoShort answer: no. Longer answer: currently no.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- pizzaparty2 7y agoWhat types of problems are quantum computers used for?
- fsh 7y agoNone. Current hardware is way to small and noisy to run any known useful algorithm.
- sjy 7y agoMany commenters are comparing this to the time sharing era of classical computing. There is an important difference here: we knew that classical computers were useful at the time, even though many people failed to predict that they would become millions of times cheaper and smaller. I’m not a physicist, but it seems to me that it’s still too early to say things like “when a quantum computer with enough qubits is available, factoring large integers will become instant and trivial.” Some experts still doubt whether quantum computing is possible at all [1]. You could not say that about classical computing before the transistor was discovered. And silicon-based computers weren’t preceded by a decade of hype about how they were about to blow vacuum tubes out of the water, just as soon as we work out the remaining engineering problems. [1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.02499 https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.02499 I think P ≠ NP is a better analogy. Is it true? Well, most people with an interest in the problem think so, but we don’t know. I think this announcement is about as significant as Amazon releasing some tutorials on computational complexity and giving out a few PhD scholarships for people working on P ≠ NP. Maybe this is what leads to the invention of the “quantum transistor,” but it’s too early to say that integer factorisation will become trivial.