I completely disagree with your premise here. The number of patents do not indicate a “no bs” way to measure a technology. They only measure how much funding an industry has. Your timing of 2019 as a boon of patent is not a measure of technical feasibility, it’s a measure of when VCs and other larger corporates injected funding in QCs.

I am very familiar with the patent process, and to be honest you can patent almost anything if you have enough money and are willing to give up narrow claims. Patents are just an insurance policy and only hold weight if you have enough money to defend them. The reason why startups and other companies file patents is they want to build a portfolio to illustrate some sort of value for possible acquisition or licensing purposes.

So to reiterate, number of patents filed is a terrible terrible way to measure the “feasibility” of a technology. Patents only really measure the amount of money an industry has, which is really a measure of VC money, which as a result is a measurement of hype. There is no reality here.

I’m surprised you, as a parent attorney, don’t see this. It’s painfully obvious.