> The issue is that the Schoor algorithm requires that the error rate of the qubit operations scale exponentially with the number of qubits. So… traditional si

> The issue is that the Schoor algorithm requires that the error rate of the qubit operations scale exponentially with the number of qubits. So… traditional silicon computing scales exponentially in time, but QC computes in constant time(!) with the minor detail that it scales exponentially in error. > If the error rate of the qubit operations decreases by 20% every year and we have exponential progress, the usefulness of the Schor algorithm taken on a log scale would be linear. Right, which is exactly the type of leeway you need, no? 1-2 qubits per year will take many decades to break ECC or RSA. It’s the same Moores law-style assumptions baked into traditional computing getting faster. > This is why IBM only uses five qubits in [3], although they already had a hundred qubit QCs at that time. It just produces meaningless results when used with more qubits. So IBM has this really cool gf, but she’s at a different school so you won’t know her. Half joking, but putting error propagation in the footnotes seems very off to me as a complete layman. Like thinking we can accurately predict the weather 5 months out with a bit more compute.