undefined | Better HN

0 pointssingularity20011y ago0 comments

  given a million qubits ...

also last time I checked the record was 80 qubits and with every doubling of the cubits the complexity of the system and the impurities and the noise are increasing. so it's even questionable whether there will ever be useful quantum computers

0 comments

ABS1y ago

Microsoft Research entire point is that their approach will allow

  "fault-tolerant quantum computing architecture based on noise-resilient, topologically protected Majorana-based qubits."

Roadmap to fault tolerant quantum computation using topological qubit arrays https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.12252

patates1y ago

Usually when people try to explain something about quantum computers, it feels like someone is trying to teach me what a monad is from the infamous example in some old haskell docs.

I'm not proud of my ignorance, and I sure hope that eventually if I get it, it'd be very useful for me. At least it worked like that for monads.

pas1y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8yHOrloxRA Bela Bauer (MS Research) - Fault Tolerant Quantum Computation using Majorana-Based Topological Qubits

(note, I have no idea how the braiding happens, or what it means, or ... the rest of the fucking owl, but ... the part about the local indistinguishability is an important part of the puzzle, and why it helps against noise ... also have no idea what's the G-factor, but ... also have no idea what the s-wave/p-wave superconductors are, but ... https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/11opcy1/comment... ... also ... phew )

jfengel1y ago

Monads are a bad way to describe a fundamentally simple thing.

Quantum computing is genuinely hard. The hardware is an extremely specialized discipline. The software is at best a very unfamiliar kind of mathematics, and has basically nothing to do with programming. At best, it may one day be a black box that you can use to solve certain conventional programming problems quickly.

euclid2111y ago

The issue isn't really impurities and noise, quantum error-correction solves that problem. The issue is that the supporting technologies don't scale well. Superconducting qubit computers like google's have a bunch of fancy wires coming out of the top, basically one for each qubit. You can't have a million wires that size, or even a smaller size, so the RF circuitry that sends signals down those wires needs to be miniaturized and designed to operate at near 0K so it can live inside the dilution refrigerator, which is not easy.

Microsoft's technology is pretty far behind as far as capacity but the scaling limitations are less significant and the error-correction overhead is either eliminated or smaller.

est1y ago

There're some crazy wires at the end of the official video

https://youtu.be/wSHmygPQukQ?t=723

Is this the scaling problem you are describing?

pankajdoharey1y ago

Based on what i read it seems a lot of algorithmic work is required to even make them useful. New algorithms have to be discovered and still they will only solve only a special class of problems. They cant do classical computing so your NVIDIA GPU probably may never be replaced by a Quantum GPU.

kalastor1y ago

I wouldn't worry too much about finding new algorithms. The sheer power of QC parallelism will attract enough talent to convert any useful classical algorithm to QC.

It's a bit similar to the invention of fast Fourier transform (was reinvented several times...), O(n log n) is so much better than O(n*2) that many problems in science and technology use FFT somewhere in their pipeline, just because it's so powerful, even if unrelated to signal processing. For example, multiplication of very large numbers use FFT (?!).

Mithriil1y ago

Quantum computing is a generalization of classical computing. Thus, they CAN do classical computing. But, in practice, it'll be not as fast, more error prone and at a bigger cost.

0x1ceb00da1y ago

> Quantum computing is a generalization of classical computing

Can you explain more or share some resources?

1 more reply

marcus0x621y ago

Maybe we'll end up with a state where typical computers have a CPU, a GPU, and a QPU to solve different problems.

moffkalast1y ago

Hopefully not, besides quantum physics simulations the only problems they solve are the ones that should remain unsolved if we're to trust the integrity of existing systems.

As soon as the first practical quantum computer is made available, so much recorded TLS encrypted data is gonna get turned into plain text, probably destroying millions of people's lives. I hope everyone working in quantum research is aware of what their work is leading towards, they're not much better than arms manufacturers working on the next nuke.

fc417fc8021y ago

This got me wondering how much of Tor, i2p, etc the NSA has archived. Or privacy coins like XMR.

I'm also curious. If you don't capture the key exchange but instead only a piece of cypher text. Is there a lower limit to the sample size required to attack the key? It feels like there must be.

moffkalast1y ago

Afaik AES is not vulnerable to any kind of statistical methods nor quantum decryption, so you'd have to capture the key exchange. Not that it makes the situation all that much better.

Agentus1y ago

i vaguely remember reading an article about solving the correlation between quantum decoherence and scaling of qubit numbers. i dont understand quantum computers so take it with a grain of salt.

but here’s what perplexity says: “Exponential Error Reduction: Willow demonstrates a scalable quantum error correction method, achieving an exponential reduction in error rates as the number of qubits increases125. This is crucial because qubits are prone to errors due to their sensitivity to environmental factors25. ”

ernesth1y ago

> last time I checked the record was 80 qubits

It has progressed since: IBM Condor (demonstrated in december 2023) has 1121 qubits.

dwnw1y ago

which is totally out of touch with the reality of making use of the extra qubits they just slapped on the chip to get a high number

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

ABS1y ago

Microsoft Research entire point is that their approach will allow

  "fault-tolerant quantum computing architecture based on noise-resilient, topologically protected Majorana-based qubits."

Roadmap to fault tolerant quantum computation using topological qubit arrays https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.12252

patates1y ago

Usually when people try to explain something about quantum computers, it feels like someone is trying to teach me what a monad is from the infamous example in some old haskell docs.

I'm not proud of my ignorance, and I sure hope that eventually if I get it, it'd be very useful for me. At least it worked like that for monads.

pas1y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8yHOrloxRA Bela Bauer (MS Research) - Fault Tolerant Quantum Computation using Majorana-Based Topological Qubits

jfengel1y ago

Monads are a bad way to describe a fundamentally simple thing.

euclid2111y ago

Microsoft's technology is pretty far behind as far as capacity but the scaling limitations are less significant and the error-correction overhead is either eliminated or smaller.

est1y ago

There're some crazy wires at the end of the official video

https://youtu.be/wSHmygPQukQ?t=723

Is this the scaling problem you are describing?

pankajdoharey1y ago

kalastor1y ago

I wouldn't worry too much about finding new algorithms. The sheer power of QC parallelism will attract enough talent to convert any useful classical algorithm to QC.

Mithriil1y ago

Quantum computing is a generalization of classical computing. Thus, they CAN do classical computing. But, in practice, it'll be not as fast, more error prone and at a bigger cost.

0x1ceb00da1y ago

> Quantum computing is a generalization of classical computing

Can you explain more or share some resources?

1 more reply

marcus0x621y ago

Maybe we'll end up with a state where typical computers have a CPU, a GPU, and a QPU to solve different problems.

moffkalast1y ago

Hopefully not, besides quantum physics simulations the only problems they solve are the ones that should remain unsolved if we're to trust the integrity of existing systems.

fc417fc8021y ago

This got me wondering how much of Tor, i2p, etc the NSA has archived. Or privacy coins like XMR.

I'm also curious. If you don't capture the key exchange but instead only a piece of cypher text. Is there a lower limit to the sample size required to attack the key? It feels like there must be.

moffkalast1y ago

Afaik AES is not vulnerable to any kind of statistical methods nor quantum decryption, so you'd have to capture the key exchange. Not that it makes the situation all that much better.

Agentus1y ago

i vaguely remember reading an article about solving the correlation between quantum decoherence and scaling of qubit numbers. i dont understand quantum computers so take it with a grain of salt.

ernesth1y ago

> last time I checked the record was 80 qubits

It has progressed since: IBM Condor (demonstrated in december 2023) has 1121 qubits.

dwnw1y ago

which is totally out of touch with the reality of making use of the extra qubits they just slapped on the chip to get a high number

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse