SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the what-if-we're-in-the-wrong-parallel-universe? dept.
Quantum computing may be leaping out of the lab soon:
Quantum computing has long seemed like one of those technologies that are 20 years away, and always will be. But 2017 could be the year that the field sheds its research-only image. Computing giants Google and Microsoft recently hired a host of leading lights, and have set challenging goals for this year. Their ambition reflects a broader transition taking place at start-ups and academic research labs alike: to move from pure science towards engineering. "People are really building things," says Christopher Monroe, a physicist at the University of Maryland in College Park who co-founded the start-up IonQ in 2015. "I've never seen anything like that. It's no longer just research."
Google started working on a form of quantum computing that harnesses superconductivity in 2014. It hopes this year, or shortly after, to perform a computation that is beyond even the most powerful 'classical' supercomputers — an elusive milestone known as quantum supremacy. Its rival, Microsoft, is betting on an intriguing but unproven concept, topological quantum computing, and hopes to perform a first demonstration of the technology.
Separate article about IonQ.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 09 2017, @11:04PM
No. Until one of these so called "quantum" computers demonstrates the ability to process quantum logic gates [wikipedia.org] under the scrutiny of a reputable academic organization, it's safe to assume they are simply running a funding scam. So far, not a single so-called "quantum" computer has been able to do anything that cannot be done in a classic electronic chip. Using exotic methods to represent traditional bits does not magically turn them into qbits.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Monday January 09 2017, @11:08PM
Google and Microsoft are running a scam, or being scammed?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @12:23AM
You say that as if large institutions with more money than they know what to do with have not been scammed by junk science peddlers before.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @12:56AM
No, I'm asking you whether you specifically believe these companies are being duped. I'm not interested in insinuations and loose possibilities.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @05:45PM
That would depend entirely on what they think D-Wave is selling them.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 09 2017, @11:07PM
Still about 20 years off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 11 2017, @01:24AM
But the AI assistant in my flying car says it's just around the corner.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Monday January 09 2017, @11:10PM
TFA:
> This rapidity should allow quantum computers to perform certain tasks, such as searching large databases or factoring large numbers,
> which would be unfeasible for slower, classical computers. The machines could also be transformational as a research tool, performing
> quantum simulations that would enable chemists to understand reactions in unprecedented detail, or physicists to design materials
> that superconduct at room temperature.
Ok... or
> The results of the calculation will not have any uses, but they will demonstrate that there are tasks at which quantum computers are
> unbeatable — an important psychological threshold that will attract the attention of potential customers,
So... I've got real-life money. Can anyone actually point out yet where my company or myself will see significant higher throughput from a quantum machine, justifying the ROI? I haven't even specified what the company does, I'm open to any suggestions of real-life algorithms proven to show the advertised benefits...
No, I don't need uncrackable encryption, my 2048-bit keys should still be good for a little while.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @03:12AM
justifying the ROI?
These machines are semi-experimental and semi-imaginary. The only return you'll receive will be measured in frustration and disappointment.
(Score: 3, Informative) by WalksOnDirt on Tuesday January 10 2017, @08:08AM
The most popular public key encryption methods depends on quantum computing not working. There are potential replacements, but it's still unclear if they are safe. Cracking other people's communications can be very profitable even though it's illegal.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by zeigerpuppy on Tuesday January 10 2017, @01:26AM
I had a fascinating conversation with a quantum physicist a few years ago.
He'd just received a multi-million pound grant from the UK and was working on quantum entangling domains by seeding crystalline substrates with impurities.
At the conclusion of our conversation, I asked him how long he thought it would be before quantum computing (at least a few qbits able to be used in synchrony) and he gave a fascinating answer: "we think we have a good method, but no-one is really sure yet; it may even be that a true quantum computer ends up being theoretically impossible."
Heisenberg may yet have his day...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @07:27PM
We can have quantum computing, BUT either some cats will die, or many cats will semi-die.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 10 2017, @03:20AM
They may be in the box, or they may not. We may never know.