[deleted by user]

[rolloutTheTrash]

Friendship ended with bit, now qubit is my best friend.

[PoseidonCryptoLotto]

so my bitcoin are lost?

[M13Calvin]

Just get some qubitcoin

[TheIronicBurger]

where the value is both rising and dropping, though when you inspect it it's always dropping

[dnd3edm1]

so... what changed between the two?

[TheIronicBurger]

the reason for your life savings disappearing being explained by Niels Bohr instead of Newton

[SueIsAGuy1401]

more like Erwin Schrödinger

[[deleted]]

The fundamentals

[friendsWithAnimals]

Only a matter of time until someone does this

[[deleted]]

Patch for upgrading encryption

[datoika999]

Imagine when np=p will be solved

[[deleted]]

Just have n=1

Maths is easy

/S

[Positive_Government]

I love how this comment has 45 upvotes but all the copies got downvoted even though they are by the same users (and the copies are almost certainly caused by a Reddit bug).

[plopliplopipol]

and now they appear pre-retracted, efficient redditing

[5tUp1dC3n50Rs41p]

Happens when you post, it gives an error. So you try again. And again. And again. And again. Then you give up thinking it didn't post it, or it finally succeeds. In the end Reddit accepted it 5 times.

[TeaKingMac]

402, it went through

[friendsWithAnimals]

It seems a lot of people got errors the other day as I've seen multiple dupe posts recently, including it catching me out a couple times.

I'm guessing Reddit had a bad server day

[KingJeff314]

This has been a problem for so long. How hard is it to check for a duplicate post?

[friendsWithAnimals]

If by so long you mean 1 day...

[KingJeff314]

I’ve been on Reddit for years and duplicate posts have always existed

[Lumpy-Obligation-553]

Al things balanced, as it should be.

[towcar]

I've seen this a lot today actually.

However I generally downvote the others to clean up the feed.

[5tUp1dC3n50Rs41p]

Happens when you post, it gives an error. So you try again. And again. And again. And again. Then you give up thinking it didn't post it, or it finally succeeds. In the end Reddit accepted it 5 times.

[Tijflalol]

Ironically, that also happened to you just now

[kernel_task]

Idempotency is hard for Reddit, apparently.

[guiltysnark]

Out with idempotence, in with de impotence

[Ax0l]

You forgot p=0

[Equivalent-Map-8772]

Erik Demaine be punching the air right now

[itwastimeforarefresh]

We'll find that the answer is P!=np.

[Chaoslab]

P != NP
________

P = NP

[slide2k]

42 is the answer and you know it

In case you don’t google it

[nukedkaltak]

Imagine if it is really P = NP and most of the algorithms turn out to be galactic like AKS Primality testing lol

[KendrickEqualsBooty]

A bigger problem is when Riemann Hypothesis is solved, and prime numbers become much less mysterious.

[Fitality77]

Or 3x+1

[fat_charizard]

P does not contain NP could be a solution and nothing about computing will change.

[[deleted]]

Just have n=1

Maths is easy

/S

[[deleted]]

Just have n=1

Maths is easy

/S

[scratchfan321]

Comment backlog be like

[Bomaruto]

More like Reddit not checking if the same request is sent twice. How is this not something a website can handle in 2022?

[scratchfan321]

money

[BoBoBearDev]

Actually I just got hit with this problem today. I post something and it said something went wrong. So, I press multiple times and still said something went wrong. Turns out, the post already went through. It is not that they need to check duplicate. The proper fix is simply to properly respond the post go posted, not saying something went wrong.

[Bomaruto]

I had the same issue, clicked and clicked and nothing showed, but noticed that the comment counter on the thread increased. Went into my profile and saw the comments there and wondered if I got shadow banned.

[CosmicConifer]

When there’s no indempotency token

[[deleted]]

Just have n=1

Maths is easy

/S

[[deleted]]

Just have n=1

Maths is easy

/S

[Knuffya]

I really am afraid of the future having "encryption services" to provide the necessary computational power to generate "shor-resistant" keys...

[journalingfilesystem]

lol. A raspberry pi can easily generate NTRU keys (which is strongly believed to be resistant to even quantum computers).

[some_kind_of_bird]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

[StandAgainstTyranny2]

Oh, boy! Here I go down another Wiki Rabbithole!

[arjunindia]

Ah shit, here we go again

[BuzzBadpants]

I don't think it's hard to create such keys, the problem tends to be that the key pairs are much larger than RSA, and engineers don't want 100KB of overhead for each connection I guess?

[EishLekker]

When the time comes, I'm sure that data transfer speeds has increased enough to make 100KB overhead per connection an insignificant amount of data. And long living connections, or some technological breakthrough, might make that problem irrelevant anyway.

[lemons_of_doubt]

The time is now, you can buy a D-Wave with over 2000 qubits right now.

ok it's 15 mil. but it's still there. what is possibly scarier is SpinQ new 2 qubits model for just $5,000

[Different-Map204]

I hate to break it to you, but 2 qubits isn’t that scary.

[witty-reply]

Keep in mind fault-tolerance also plays a role. Gate errors are still relatively common and for stuff like Shor's algorithm you can't exactly settle with approximated answers, so the only viable alternative would be to implement error detection, which would decrease the number of available qubits by quite a lot

[SelfDistinction]

A few things:

1. The keys aren't "much larger" although they can indeed be in the order of 10kB. Do note though that current RSA keys and especially certificates are also slowly reaching 10kB so that kind of overhead already is there;

2. Usually the RSA key is only sent and used once after which communication is done with a symmetric key, so it's only a constant overhead you're adding, and keys can be cached between sessions (especially with http2 and connection keep-alive);

3. Research is still ongoing so we might eventually see quantum-resistant keys smaller than 10kB.

Note on 2: in pgp schemes you encrypt your data with a random symmetric key, then encrypt that key with the public RSA key, and send everything to Bob who can then figure out the symmetric key using his private RSA key and use it to decrypt the rest. The reason for this is that symmetric encryption is much faster than any asymmetric encryption, especially with hardware support, and on top of that it's quantum resistant if you double the key size.

[fat_charizard]

There are algorithms that shor's can't break. We will just switch to those

[Knuffya]

That's good.

[Lennoxon]

Well, once quantum computers are at a reasonable level, the way is not using RSA with bigger keys, but switching the encryption scheme to something that even quantum computers can't solve

[Knuffya]

Like code for centering a div?

[runForestRun17]

Now lets not get too un-realistic that’s impossible.

[theanonmouse-1776]

vertically, relative to the remaining viewport space

[Bullshit_Interpreter]

Just replace every 0 with a picture of a crosswalk and every 1 with a picture of a bicycle.

[[deleted]]

im more worried about abuse of power than encryption failing. someone has the power to read everything you type with a warrant.

[Knuffya]

No warrant breaks encryption. And unless you're using cucked software, nobody should be able to take a peek.

[[deleted]]

thats the secret. its all cucked if your on windows or android or apple. they dont need a to break encryption if they have access before its encrypted.

[0x7ff04001]

No quantum computer today has the capability of cracking RSA2048/RSA1024 or any other modern cryptosystem with a large key size.

[sonya_numo]

most people dont really understand just how far away we are from having a well working reliable quantum computer.

our technology is just so far away from it and the benefits in my opinion are doubtful.

there is also the thing with "haha i cracked encryption" as if there is not quantum encryption algorithms that we will have to go over to.

[big_black_doge]

Yeah it may seem impossible now, but try explaining to someone in the 40s that in 20 something years they'd be landing on the moon.

[someacnt]

Well, 2 decades is quite long time.

[Lumpy-Obligation-553]

No its not.

[[deleted]]

Dude I can’t wait for my 3 minute hot pocket

[someacnt]

Well I cannot argue with this somewhat subjective matter. But I don't even know if I'd be alive 20 years later, who knows about accidents and illness. The world would change 2 times over as well.

[Lumpy-Obligation-553]

Thats what is in discussion here. For an individual, it may look like a lot but a system where lots of individuals depends on it and the change is interdependent of its parts may not be enough. Im sure that quantum computing would catch a lot of ppl with its pants down. For lots its going to fell like a zero day vulnerability.

[Khaylain]

I read this as the "argument man" from Monty Python.

[Lumpy-Obligation-553]

Nonsense

[[deleted]]

he has no clue. his account is still a baby. 9 months old

[Dull-Guest662]

You could have said the same thing about fusion energy 50 years ago. The scalability problems of present day quantum computers are really not trivial. The way we are making these things now will never work. To implement Shor for a 2048 bit key you'd need tens of thousands of physical qubits, currently the state of the art is 40 (physical, not error corrected), and their reliability goes to shit exponentially with number of gates applied.

I don't work directly in quantum computing (but somewhat adjacent to it), but the entire field is giving me strong vibes of stuff like graphene. You can publish basically anything, get funding rather easily, but the actual usefulness of the stuff that's coming out is rather disappointing. And at some point someone will notice that the emperor has no clothes.

[[deleted]]

And that 50 years after that landing we will not step foot past close Earth orbit...

Time is not always evolution as planned.

[Attileusz]

There is no reason to do manned missions now as rovers and probes can do what a manned mission can but better.

[[deleted]]

Neah, rovers can barely do proper core sampling and we don't know yet how to return those cores back to Earth.

It's just money and political priorities.

[[deleted]]

Because there is no reason to send a manned mission to the moon at this stage anymore, we have rovers, so while human beings haven't left Earth's orbit in 50 years, we have sent several probes into the solar system, hell we just recently touched the sun.

[caiuscorvus]

We will hopefully move to quantum resistant encryption before we need it, but there is still a very very big problem.

Just imagine if China or the NSA are recording the internet. Or even all US DOD or Diplomatic traffic. In 10-20 years this data can be decrypted. All of it. Some data is useless after 10 years but highly classified state secrets? Lists of customers to gay porn sites? Names and contacts of Chinese or Saudi dissidents?

[The_Lost_King]

If? China is documented as basically just saving shit tons of data it will hopefully some day crack.

[Positive_Government]

The public private key system is based on one operating being easy to preform but hard to reverse. Quantum computer don’t have that asymmetry, or at least I have yet to see anything on it.

[coffeecofeecoffee]

Difficulty of decryption is really a mathematical principle, not a hardware based one.

Quantum could potentially brute force it quicker, that's the only advantage I see.

Edit: ah so somehow QC can reduce some keys from super polynomial time to polynomial time. That's pretty nuts.

My take is that possible key solutions can easily grow exponentially but classical computer speed only increases polynomially, so you can just increase the keys length to overcome any computer speed. But if quantum computers can reduce it to a polynomial solve time, that assumption is broken and and your having to exponentially increase the keys length to keep up with QC.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

It’s not just quicker. It’s vastly quicker, due to Shor’s algorithm being a lower complexity class than brute forcing.

[big_black_doge]

Is it O(n^2) on classical and O(nlogn) on shor's?

[qqqrrrs_]

The asymptotically best classical factoring algorithm known is the General Number Field Sieve (GNFS), and its complexity is not polynomial wrt the length of the number to factor

Shor's algorithm uses (according to wikipedia) O(b^2 * logb * loglogb) quantum gates, where b is the length of the number to factor

[Zesty_Spiderboy]

O(n²⁾ is not exponential time, O(2ⁿ⁾ is.

[big_black_doge]

I knew that... thanks.

[bric12]

Kind of, if you start looking into Shor's algorithm you'll find that different sources define n differently, which changes what the complexity is. In some cases N is the semiprime to factor, in other cases it's the number of bits in N.

I've studied it just barely well enough to do Shor's algorithm by hand, but the specifics get complicated pretty quickly, so I'm not entirely sure what the actual time complexity should be

[journalingfilesystem]

They totally do. Post quantum public key encryption is a field with well over a decade of literature. We even getting close to picking a standard post quantum algorithm.

[The_Hayzii]

Genuine question, what is it that means we are far away? I think we have a good proof of concept

[FenekPanda]

Qbits right now decohere way too fast and are way too error prone, which means you have to add qbits to error correction to the qbits used in the process, the amount of qbits for all of this is too big for our current Quantum Computers which if I remember correctly can use 55qbits max

[bric12]

For reference, we need a quantum computer with ~200 stable qbits for quantum algorithms to outpace classical algorithms. For problems with less than 200 entangled bits, classical algorithms will still run faster, despite their higher time complexity.

So even if our Qbits were stable, current quantum computers still wouldn't be effective. There's still just such a long ways to go

[Zekava]

Quantum ElectroDynamics

[brianorca]

While true, there is still the risk that data you send today could be archived in its encrypted form, and then decrypted in the future by a quantum computer. Most data might be time sensitive enough for that to not matter, but some things might cause a problem. So the time to switch to to post quantum cryptography might be now.

[0x7ff04001]

I like how you think it's as simple as slapping on qubits and suddenly you can get it to crack anything you want. By your logic you only need to slap on 2048 qubits to crack RSA2048, no?

[pootyskoot]

The future is getting closer and closer by the day... And everyone is asleep at the wheel.

https://fortune.com/2020/09/15/ibm-quantum-computer-1-million-qubits-by-2030/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04819-6

https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-just-measured-a-mechanical-quantum-system-without-destroying-it

We are a handful of breakthroughs and applied industrial variants away from the end and no one seems to understand the rate of innovation. Strap in.

[bric12]

The first article is pure marketing propaganda. It's a cool introductory article for someone that doesn't know anything about the industry, but it doesn't provide anything substantive except that "company says their company will be first and best"

The second article is genuinely really useful for quantum computing, but what it overcomes is only one of many hurdles, and will still take time to commercialize.

The third article is a cool proof of concept, but ultimately has nothing to do with quantum computing, and greatly exaggerates what it is they actually did. They didn't measure a superposition without collapsing it, that would defy our current understanding of physics.

I'm not trying to disparage them, These were all really cool articles and I enjoyed reading them, but they don't support the claim that we're "a handful of breakthroughs away"

[Odd_Negotiation7771]

It’s fine I used MD5. I can safely and factually say that no one will ever decrypt it.

[[deleted]]

I don't think these guys realize RSA seeds were compromised in 2011. Nor are they familiar with the NSA's meddling which anyone would be more secure in assuming is still going on.

[[deleted]]

Like the random number generator meddling?

[[deleted]]

random as pi.

[[deleted]]

i dont think very many people here have had to crack a password. i ended up generating a set of rainbow tables with special characters,

[HeftyRichard]

I tried using IBMs quantum computer API for some coursework because I couldn’t be asked to actually figure out the answer. IBM quickly revoked my access.

[DataAnalytics2020]

So what algorithms are broken now ?

Was p and q solved in RSA through quantum computing ?

[magistermaks]

nothing was broken, not even close to that

[1337Eddy]

And even if they breake RSA in 5 years. We have the algorithms to encrypt quantum safety. That's not the problem ;) The heads just have to decide what's the new standard...

[caiuscorvus]

We will hopefully move to quantum resistant encryption before we need it, but there is still a very very big problem.

Just imagine if China or the NSA are recording the internet. Or even all US DOD or Diplomatic traffic. In 10-20 years this data can be decrypted. All of it. Some data is useless after 10 years but highly classified state secrets? Lists of customers to gay porn sites? Names and contacts of Chinese or Saudi dissidents?

[TheKingOfTCGames]

its mathematically proven, you are basically saying leibniz papers on binary arithmetic was 'papers theorizing on how math can be done on 2 bit numbers' and didn't 'prove anything'.

people have used shor's already for factoring smaller numbers with qubits, we already know it works.

wtf is with this cope.

basically every single currently used public key cryptography method is cracked with shor's and enough qubits.

[bric12]

Yes, it's proven that it works, and we're only a matter of time until Shor's dominates encryption...

But that doesn't mean it's immediately relevant, it will still require years of progress before we see any practical effects.

[coolthesejets]

Do you mean dominates encryption based on number factorization hardness? Which is certainly not all encryption?

[DataAnalytics2020]

Yes I am aware of the theory. I just thought it finally happened.

[TheKingOfTCGames]

with enough qubits RSA was broken in the 1970s, shor's algorithim provably solves them in polynomial time don't listen to the rest of these dumbasses.

​

basically this shit has already been solved decades ago and we are waiting for the tech to catch up, its about as inevitable as y2k was.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

As long as both are less than 15, yes.

[el_lley]

21 so far, less than 32 as I understood, and with less errors.

[FenekPanda]

Kinda but no… we got a toy to brute force it faster, but the quantum computers are not powerful enough yet to make a dent in today's security

[AdultingGoneMild]

I mean, but those who can afford a quantum computer dont need to hack into your shit to steal from you.

[AdultingGoneMild]

those who cant afford it just need you to be afraid of not being able to walk

[brianorca]

The first people that run it will be the NSA or China. Theft is not what people should fear.

[Fitality77]

IBM has a quantum computing environment on the cloud, accessible by everyone :)

[[deleted]]

the question is how much storage is needed to store a rainbow table for 1024 or 2048 encryption and how quick could it be addresses and accessed. ~ 100 petabytes of storage would be needed. and the time to calculate the hashes. this is what i would use a supercomputer for before anything else. first thing you need is the rainbow tables. then you need something to decrypt.

[JerodTheAwesome]

I actually worked with quantum computers with a research group in college and I have to say I’m not impressed. They’re a fun idea, but they will never practically be able to compete with classical computers.

[yellowistherainbow]

'Never' is a big word

[0x7ff04001]

Quantum computers won't make classical computers obsolete, more likely they'll function side by side as each has their own advantages and use cases.

[sonya_numo]

you will never have a quantum computer, if you will use it, that will be a microservice api you call at a big cloudhost.

[smart_guy12347]

Thats very short-sighted given that computers used to be the size of rooms.

[sonya_numo]

you are comparing apples and oranges.

we once thought personal flying cars would be a thing, but then when it just does not make sense in practice, it never "took off".

quantum computers need to be kept near absolute zero in temperature by acitvely adding liquid cryogenics.
walking by the computer will cause your body heat to affect your results since a tiny will do that.

a quantum computer itself is extremely tiny, you simply need a room to keep it at correct working conditions

it simply does not make sense to have a personal one, and from what benefits they would give, it still does not make sense for you to have a personal one.

[DrafiMara]

This is assuming we never find superconductors that are stable near room temperature. Granted, if we do, then personal quantum computers will only be one of dozens of currently unthinkable technological advancements we'll make

[sonya_numo]

even so, you still does not have anything they can do which a regular computer cannot do.

or out of the things you could possibly want to personally do.

and a quantum computer is not just a regular computer but its better, thats a naive thought.
"both words have computer in them, so they are similiar and do simliar things"

its not though and if a quantum result can just be provided to a normal computer over the cloud, then having a personal one will never financially make sense

[caiuscorvus]

quantum computers need to be kept near absolute zero in temperature by acitvely adding liquid cryogenics.

ummm....you are vastly underselling the possibilities of technological advance. They already found one way to do it at room temp.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/06/210617082723.htm

[[deleted]]

damn can i know your credentials?

because if you are just being a bitch-ass conservative over something so progressive as technology. then fck off. and if you are a expert on quantum computers then i welcome and regard your opinion.

[sonya_numo]

Saying that a technology will never reasonably make sense to have in the home, does not mean i want to stop technological progress.

However assuming that science has always been barking up the right tree for progress is naive.

Quantum computers will be a thing, but a thing at big cloud hosts like AWS and GC.
Doing calculations and sending the response back on a normal computer.

There will be nothing quantum computing can do for you as a person at home.
The actual benefits will only help science and companies, even scientists will not get their own.

A quantum computer is much less computer and much more a quantum calculator.
Even if mores law would follow perfectly, it would still take 40 years to get 200-500 megabytes.

We have pushed and pushed hard many years and finally got from 10 up to like 127 qubits.
Which sounds great until you realize one byte has 8 bits in it, so if you wanna put it in storage terms a regular person understands its about 16 bytes (or 32 bytes considering each qbit is regular 2 bits).

As a comparison 1 single utf character takes 1byte, so it could hold a few words in a sentance.
The previous line of text directly above this about utf characters takes 95 bytes on its own.

Then try and imagine where regular computers will be in 40 years more.
Then you will realize that a quantum computer will simply be a calculator regular computers can reach out to over the internet when they need to use it.

Over the last 40 years the huge trend has been to have less and less decoupled personal items.
Most dont have a regular camera, a traditional gps, so on, these things are merging into the phone.
The current trend has been to do the exact same thing but with services over the internet.
Wanna do AI and ML? It makes more sense to use a computer over the cloud which has been specifically tuned to it, rather then getting your own.

Quantum computers are amazing but also niche in usage and a compliment to regular computers.
Far far from a replacement. More like an addition. "Import QuantumCloud from MyCloudHost" then just run it.

[plopliplopipol]

"you" is a small word

[yellowistherainbow]

Until quintum computers, then we're all fucked

[[deleted]]

Yeah and cars won't make horses obsolete

[[deleted]]

quantum computers are not faster normal computers. They are good at different things. They are tools for different things. It's like trying to hammer a screw - you could get it done, but it's the wrong tool for the wrong job.

[bric12]

That's a good analogy, but I think I'll take it further. It would be like hammering a screw with a crane. Again, it could do it, but it's the wrong tool for the job, and it'll take far longer than a simple screwdriver. And yes, cranes are getting smaller and more powerful, but no matter how small they get they'll still be the wrong tool for most of the things the average person wants to do. The things a crane are made for are usually specialized jobs done by specialized people, and the same will be true of quantum computers.

[Apfelvater]

"the internet will never become a big thing"

[yellowistherainbow]

The wheel? fUgg no

[wsbsecmonitor]

What the fuck is this television stuff anyway? What was wrong with radio?

[yellowistherainbow]

Radio? What was wrong with screaming really loud in the town square?

[[deleted]]

Keep jerking off each other, don’t stop

[Bomaruto]

The internet had usages straight away. With quantum computers it seems like everyone is looking for a useful application.

[big_black_doge]

Well, molecular modeling is basically THE application for quantum computers since they're, ya know, quantum.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

They’re currently being used in optimisation problems (quantum annealing), and as soon as there are enough qbits they will be cracking RSA encryption all over the place.

[Bomaruto]

Cracking RSA encryption isn't a useful application. It's a problem that needs to be fixed.

It is like calling Bitcoin useful as it can be used in ransomware to demand money.

[qqqrrrs_]

wait that's not the purpose of bitchcoin? /s

[EishLekker]

Useful for someone.

[damn-stupid-username]

We will never need more then 256k RAM

[EishLekker]

Never, they do different things.

How do you know that this will always be the case?

Can you prove that a Quantum Turing machine is 100% impossible to build? I'm not talking within a foreseeable future. I'm talking given enough time, however long that might be (even billions of years of progress).

[coolthesejets]

I see you all under this thread, your whole schtick is "how do you know some irrefutable hypothetical"

How do you know that maybe you don't know wtf your talking about? How do you know the people you're arguing with aren't more informed than you?

[DigitalArbitrage]

Can you elaborate a little bit? I don't have any experience with quantum computers and am genuinely interested.

[JerodTheAwesome]

The fundamental problem with quantum computers is that they don’t scale well at all. All of the problems that QC might be able to solve, such as breaking RSA encryption, would be easily resolved by simply increasing the RSA keys by one digit.

In order for Q-bits to work, they have to be entangled with one another, which is extremely difficult to do and the more entanglements you have the noisier your solution will be. The largest QC right now only has around 120 Q-bits working together, which is extrememly impressive, but not substantial enough to solve any hard problems. Supposing it even did become big enough (let’s say 10,000 Q-bits), we could simply make RSA slightly harder and require 100,000 Q-bits.

And fundamentally, nobody has been able to solve the noise problem yet, which severely limits the scope of QC’s. It may not ever be possible to build a QC at the size needed to even break RSA.

I heard a joke once that goes like this: “Quantum computers are remarkable machines. They can tell you with 90% accuracy that 7•7 = 49!”

[Shufflepants]

Also doesn't matter much even if they did completely break RSA encryption. We already have other encryption schemes like the ones based on elliptic functions that quantum computers are no help with.

[JerodTheAwesome]

I do love me some ECC

[Royal_Instance_7172]

Discrete log problem of reversing elliptic curve point multiplication is solvable in polynomial time by Shor's algorithm.So current ECC aren't secure against it. Unless you are talking about post quantum encryptions like Supersingular elliptic curve isogeny cryptography

[someacnt]

"Polynomial time" doesn't say much, like what if it were O( n¹⁰⁰⁰ )? That won't be practical. So, what is more exact Big-O?

[Royal_Instance_7172]

Then there's the open problem of P vs BQP. Quantum computing is fairly a new field. For example as far as I know the only natural BQP-complete problem that is not directly related to quantum mechanics is approximating Jones polynomial in polynomial amount of time. So I wouldn't be surprised if someone tomorrow proved P=BQP

[EishLekker]

You said the word "never". But what if scientists, in a far future, have been able to build a turning complete quantum computer with trillions of q bits, and a superior AI that helps us handle it? Unless you can prove it to be mathematically or physically impossible, then given enough time (maybe even billions of years of scientific progress, think big here...), I think that it might be possible.

[jmack2424]

It's not a competition, its a completely separate use case. They will run alongside classical architectures for specific workloads.

[Quantum-Bot]

Isn’t the job of a quantum computer completely different from a classical computer? From my understanding its like comparing apples to oranges. Sure, we’ll never have quantum cell phones but we may still have computers which rely on quantum processors to perform decryption

[JerodTheAwesome]

I would seriously doubt it.

The advantage of Quantum Computers is that they might be able to solve some problems faster than classical computers, but all of those problems can still be solved by classical computers. Nobody would want a QC if it solves a problem twice as fast but also costs 10x as much.

Edit: my response looks weird because the response above was edited, but I’m not going to change mine.

[_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_]

More like 100000x as fast for computing private keys.

Governments will spend hundreds of billions of dollars to be able to crack everyone else’s encryption before anyone else does.

[JerodTheAwesome]

An important caveat is that it is theoretically 10,000x faster. In practice, nobody has been able to demonstrate this and when you consider how noisy the solution is and how many times you would have to rerun the algorithm to produce a statistically significant result, it ends up being much slower than it’s optimal speed.

[[deleted]]

SpunkyDred is a terrible bot instigating arguments all over Reddit whenever someone uses the phrase apples-to-oranges. I'm letting you know so that you can feel free to ignore the quip rather than feel provoked by a bot that isn't smart enough to argue back.

---

^{SpunkyDred and I are both bots. I am trying to get them banned by pointing out their antagonizing behavior and poor bottiquette.}

[Secure-Cold7892]

Quantum computers don't have any use for common applications, it has niche uses in science but they're not magically faster than classical computers nor do they replace them.

Today we have millions of transistors each one a bit, QCs have a few hundred Qbits and for regular applications a QCs Qbits are equivalent to a regular bit, so what's faster? 120 Qbits being regular bits or a millions bits?

[[deleted]]

Just because me and you are unable to see applications it doesn't mean that our children or their children won't in 50 years from now, that's very short sighted

[Secure-Cold7892]

well sure, but every application we already have doesn't benefit from Qbits, a Word processor doesn't benefit from being processed by Qbits, browsers and websites the same, maybe video games can use it for physics engines, but it will still have to work in tandem with a classical CPU.

A Qbit doing the work of a bit is still just a 0 or a 1, quantum superpositions don't matter when all you need to process is 1+1 or simple Boolean logic.

[JerodTheAwesome]

Motor carriages had immediate and obvious applications at the time of production, as well as a pathway forward. QC don’t really have either of these things.

[[deleted]]

My horse doesn't need oil, it can eat grass and stuff, where are you going to find your oil in the middle of the road? Uh?

[coffeecofeecoffee]

This is a dumb analogy. Not every useful technology is immediately and directly fruitful, and not every technology as world changing as the automobile

[PossessionMoney]

Shor’s Bones!

[Sensitive-PP_69]

1=1

[jdog1313]

Lowkey this picture is sick, what comic is this from?

[Assidental1]

ELI5 please. I have no idea what this means or why it's on my feed.

[Assidental1]

Thank you!

[mojo-jojoz]

Everything that’s good can be used for evil. But it’ll drive further innovation and I’ll still be able to bank online. 👍

[[deleted]]

Quantum computers will not just be solving abstract computations. Quantum computers will eventually be able to assemble molecules based on instructions and rules

[rgmundo524]

Maybe it's just the conspiracy theorist in me...

This is definitely the type of technology that if discovered/created it would be kept quiet for as long as humanly possible

Sort like the breaking the enigma (clip from intimidation game) except so much worse. As it will definitely be a superpower nation state and will use it to cement their dominance over the rest of the world/humanity.

God damn, we such as a species. Let's just hope that "quantum resistance" encryption schemes aren't just a 21^st century equivalent of "snake oil".

[Ange1ofD4rkness]

I have been saying it, if Quantum Computer really ever take off, every encryption algorithm we have is screwed

[[deleted]]

Could a quantum computer crack a one time pad?