Cloud Hosting

A quantum computing chip made by IonQ, a startup based in Maryland. | Walker Steere / IonQ

The hype around quantum computing has grown exponentially forgive the math pun as of late, even as good old ones-and-zeroes-based artificial intelligence has had its world-changing moment in the sun.

The power, promise, and quandary of quantum computing are all contained in the difference between a quantum computer and a standard one. Whereas even the most powerful supercomputer does its work through a binary system of ones and zeroes, a quantum computer programs the subatomic state. In that state, mere particles are a platform for computation, allowing for an almost infinitely more powerful, speedy, and sophisticated series of calculations.

The quantum computers that might follow from that innovation, some say, can do practically anything: Theyll solve climate change, and make modern cryptography obsolete. They might revolutionize drug discovery, or make gene editing as easy as a simple cardiogram. They could even allow you to witness the age of dinosaurs or the crucifixion of Jesus Christ as they really happened. (Okay, that last one was from a cable miniseries, but you get the point.)

Recent years have seen companies including Google and a university in China claim to have reached quantum supremacy, or the demonstration of capabilities far beyond that of a classical computer; this years second annual Quantum World Congress claimed to bring a quantum-ready future into focus. But what does that even mean? How close are we to living in a world where everything from cybersecurity to medicine is utterly transformed by that revolution in how computers work at a subatomic level?

The people who need to raise huge amounts of venture capital or government funding have this enormous interest in making it appear like this is all going to happen next year, says Scott Aaronson, the director of the Quantum Information Center at the University of Texas at Austin. I spend a lot of my time both arguing against people who claim that quantum computing is going to revolutionize everything next year, and also against the people who say that its impossible.

You dont have to get bogged down in the details of physics or mathematics to see why quantum computing could be a boon, or danger, to society. As early as 1994, the physicist Peter Shor showed that quantum computers could theoretically break almost any code known to man, eventually leading the National Institute of Standards and Technology to hold a worldwide contest to develop quantum-proof new systems. Aaronson says quantum technology could someday simulate complicated scientific problems, leading to breakthroughs in battery and chemical technology. And, of course, quantum computers could help solve long-standing questions in particle physics, the very field that makes them possible.

Before quantum computers do all that, however, they have to do something a little more prosaic: Actually beat their classical counterparts at anything useful at all.

A huge amount of the recent investment in quantum computing has been driven by what we could we could generously call aspirational quantum algorithms, Aaronson said. Conceivably, they would exponentially outperform a classical computer. Will they actually do that? Well, you know, who has any idea. But no one can prove that they wont.

Getting quantum computers to that point depends in part on the way the systems are built and maintained the conditions under which they maintain programmability are so fragile that IBMs quantum computers, for example, need to be held at a temperature a hundredth of a degree above absolute zero, although methods for dealing with quantum decoherence vary.

Physicist Wesley Campbell leads a group at the University of California Los Angeles researching trapped-ion quantum systems, where the delicate environment required to sustain those systems is created by confining those ions to a vacuum. He said that despite the extent to which this research is already a boon to physics, he expects it to be a long time before it has any real practical application.

Companies used to do R&D, and basically now they just do D, Campbell said. All of quantum computing right now is still R.

Luckily for quantum mavens, governments across the world are eager to give them a leg up in that department. Here in the U.S., the National Quantum Initiative Act was signed into law in 2018, authorizing more than $1 billion for quantum-related research and standing up new quantum-focused offices across various federal agencies. That act expired on Sept. 30 but is widely expected to be re-authorized this Congress, and last years CHIPS and Science Act authorized its own slate of pro-quantum funding.

Europe isnt lagging on this front either, authorizing its own 1 billion research project to stake a claim in the quantum race. The nascent state of quantum computing research means that theres plenty up for grabs for any nation with the brainpower and cash to invest in it.

A courtroom sketch from Sam Bankman-Fried's fraud trial. | AP

Sam Bankman-Fried is on trial in Manhattan, but hes a problem on the Hill.

A team of POLITICO reporters wrote this morning about the headaches SBFs trial is causing for a now-poorly-timed effort to pass landmark crypto legislation. Bills currently working their way through the House of Representatives would establish a regulatory framework largely seen as favorable to the crypto industry, checking the influence of the Securities and Exchange Commission (which has been aggressive in regulating crypto) and promoting the use and development of stablecoins pegged to the U.S. dollar.

But, the elephant in the room Bankman-Fried is not helping. If youre not familiar with the crypto industry and this is the first time youre thinking about it your impression is certainly not a positive one, said Kristin Smith, CEO of the leading industry group the Blockchain Association. He was a terrible ambassador for our industry.

Thats created a political opening for crypto-skeptical Democrats including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who is co-sponsoring a bill that would crack down on crypto-assisted money laundering. Warren told POLITICO Sam Bankman-Frieds trial will remind everyone in Congress about the risks that an unregulated crypto industry poses for all of our constituents, for our economy and for international stability.

The U.S. doesnt have a monopoly on the culture war debates shaking up tech and science.

POLITICOs Vincent Manancourt reported today on a speech from U.K. Science and Tech Secretary Michelle Donelan, who urged vigilance against creeping wokeism in scientific research echoing criticism from the right on this side of the pond that social justice ideology threatens human progress.

Fundamentally, I believe adults should have more choice over what they see, not the state and not tech executives thousands of miles away because we are the party of free speech, and we should stay that way, Donelan said, touting her alterations to the U.K.s Online Safety Bill that made it harder for tech companies to remove content described as legal but harmful.

Stay in touch with the whole team: Ben Schreckinger ([emailprotected]); Derek Robertson ([emailprotected]); Mohar Chatterjee ([emailprotected]); Steve Heuser ([emailprotected]); Nate Robson ([emailprotected]) and Daniella Cheslow ([emailprotected]).

If youve had this newsletter forwarded to you, you can sign up and read our mission statement at the links provided.

Excerpt from:
Checking in on the quantum hype - POLITICO - POLITICO