4 ms·

By your estimation, what does this practically mean in terms of: we may be able to do X Y and Z in ______ years now because of this development and other recent

By your estimation, what does this practically mean in terms of: we may be able to do X Y and Z in ______ years now because of this development and other recent innovations in quantum computing. I’m more curious about this from a consumer angle - anything with at least a downstream consumer impact that is exciting? And even if no consumer impact for the foreseeable future, is there anything “cool” or more tangible than massive encryption breaking?

hansvm 3y ago
The encryption angle is somewhat uninteresting. Old recorded messages will be broken eventually, quantum computing or not. Thwarting the quantum threat for new keys just requires a constant factor of additional work (key size, encryption cost). Thwarting it without much overhead is an ongoing research problem. The ______ years question is everyone's best guess. X, Y, and Z though are quantum simulations. Drug discovery, superconductors, "better" alloys (use-case dependent), .... It's shockingly expensive to simulate a properly quantum system, and that cost increases exponentially in its size. 1 atom is manageable usually, ignoring relativity. 2 is an interesting research problem. 3 are tractable if they're homogenous and you're patient. Everything beyond that requires huge simplifications or clever insights (or both). Quantum computing linearizes that simulation cost, for any problem small enough to fit inside the given qubit bounds. One way to estimate the effect might be to look at current chemistry-related AI/ML news. It's a noiser version of the same results. If that winds up being useful then quantum computers will be even more useful (but perhaps not worth it). If that doesn't advance materials research enough then it's less obvious that a quantum computer will be helpful. Maybe, maybe not.
- tromp 3y ago
  > Old recorded messages will be broken eventually, quantum computing or not. That may well take multiple lifetimes, greatly reducing its impact. Mere increases in computing power will not break 256 bit Elliptic Curve cryptography for centuries. That will require algorithmic breakthroughs or large scale quantum computers as well.

hansvm 3y ago

The encryption angle is somewhat uninteresting. Old recorded messages will be broken eventually, quantum computing or not. Thwarting the quantum threat for new keys just requires a constant factor of additional work (key size, encryption cost). Thwarting it without much overhead is an ongoing research problem. The ______ years question is everyone's best guess. X, Y, and Z though are quantum simulations. Drug discovery, superconductors, "better" alloys (use-case dependent), .... It's shockingly expensive to simulate a properly quantum system, and that cost increases exponentially in its size. 1 atom is manageable usually, ignoring relativity. 2 is an interesting research problem. 3 are tractable if they're homogenous and you're patient. Everything beyond that requires huge simplifications or clever insights (or both). Quantum computing linearizes that simulation cost, for any problem small enough to fit inside the given qubit bounds. One way to estimate the effect might be to look at current chemistry-related AI/ML news. It's a noiser version of the same results. If that winds up being useful then quantum computers will be even more useful (but perhaps not worth it). If that doesn't advance materials research enough then it's less obvious that a quantum computer will be helpful. Maybe, maybe not.

tromp 3y ago
> Old recorded messages will be broken eventually, quantum computing or not. That may well take multiple lifetimes, greatly reducing its impact. Mere increases in computing power will not break 256 bit Elliptic Curve cryptography for centuries. That will require algorithmic breakthroughs or large scale quantum computers as well.