Category Archives: Quantum Computer
Quantum computers could soon reveal all of our secrets. The race is on to stop that happening – ZDNet
A fully-fledged quantum computer that can be used to solve real-world problems. For many computer scientists, the arrival of such a device would be their version of the Moon landings: the final achievement after many decades of research -- and the start of a new era.
For companies, the development could unlock huge amounts of wealth, as business problems previously intractable for classical computers are resolved in minutes. For scientists in the lab, it could expedite research into the design of life-saving drugs.
But for cryptographers, that same day will be a deadline -- and a rather scary one. With the compute power that they will be capable of, large-scale quantum devices effectively pose an existential threat to the security protocols that currently protect most of our data, from private voice notes all the way to government secrets.
SEE: Network security policy (TechRepublic Premium)
The encryption methods that are used today to transform data into an unreadable mush for anyone but the intended recipients are essentially a huge maths problem. Classical computers aren't capable of solving the equation in any useful time frame; add some quantum compute power, though, and all of this carefully encoded data could turn into crystal-clear, readable information.
The heart of the problem is public key encryption -- the protocol that's used to encode a piece of data when it is sent from one person to another, in a way that only the person on the receiving end of the message can decode. In this system, each person has a private cryptography key as well as a public one, both of which are generated by the same algorithm and inextricably tied to each other.
The publicly-available key can be used by any sender to encrypt the data they would like to transmit. Once the message has arrived, the owner of the key can then use their private key to decrypt the encoded information. The security of the system is based on the difficulty of figuring out a person's private key based on their public one, because solving that problem involves factoring huge amounts of numbers.
Inconveniently, if there's one thing that quantum computers will be good at, it's crunching numbers. Leveraging the quasi-supernatural behaviour of particles in their smallest state, quantum devices are expected to one day breeze through problems that would take current supercomputers years to resolve.
That's bad news for the security systems that rely on hitherto difficult mathematics. "The underlying security assumptions in classical public-key cryptography systems are not, in general, quantum-secure," says Niraj Kumar, a researcher in secure communications from the school of informatics at the University of Edinburgh.
"It has been shown, based on attacks to these keys, that if there is quantum access to these devices, then these systems no longer remain secure and they are broken."
Researchers have developed quantum algorithms that can, in theory, break public-key cryptography systems.
But as worrying as it sounds, explains Kumar, the idea that all of our data might be at risk from quantum attacks is still very much theoretical. Researchers have developed quantum algorithms, such as Shor's algorithm, that can, in theory, break public-key cryptography systems. But they are subject to no small condition: that the algorithms operate in a quantum computer with a sufficient number of qubits, without falling to noise or decoherence.
In other words, a quantum attack on public-key cryptography systems requires a powerful quantum computer, and such a device is not on any researcher's near-term horizon. Companies involved in the field are currently sitting on computers of the order of less than 100 qubits; in comparison, recent studies have shown that it would take about 20 million qubits to break the algorithms behind public-key cryptography.
Kumar, like most researchers in the field, doesn't expect a quantum device to reach a meaningful number of qubits within the next ten or 20 years. "The general consensus is that it is still very much a thing of the future," he says. "We're talking about it probably being decades away. So any classical public-key cryptography scheme used for secure message transmission is not under imminent threat."
NIST, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, for its part estimates that the first quantum computer that could pose a threat to the algorithms that are currently used to produce encryption keys could be built by 2030.
Don't let the timeline fool you, however: this is not a problem that can be relegated to future generations. A lot of today's data will still need to be safe many years hence -- the most obvious example being ultra-secret government communications, which will need to remain confidential for decades.
This type of data needs to be protected now with protocols that will withstand quantum attacks when they become a reality. Governments around the world are already acting on the quantum imperative: in the UK, for example, the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has accepted for several years now that it is necessary to end reliance on current cryptography protocols, and to begin the transition to what's known as 'quantum-safe cryptography'.
Similarly, the US National Security Agency (NSA), which currently uses a set of algorithms called Suite B to protect top-secret information, noted in 2015 that it was time to start planning the transition towards quantum-resistant algorithms.
As a direct result of the NSA's announcement five years ago, a global research effort into new quantum-safe cryptography protocols started in 2016, largely led by NIST in the US. The goal? To make classical public-key cryptography too difficult a problem to solve, even for a quantum computer -- an active research field now called 'post-quantum cryptography'.
NIST launched a call for help to the public, asking researchers to submit ideas for new algorithms that would be less susceptible to a quantum computer's attack. Of the 69 submissions that the organization received at the time, a group of 15 was recently selected by NIST as showing the most promise.
SEE: Security Awareness and Training policy (TechRepublic Premium)
There are various mathematical approaches to post-quantum cryptography, which essentially consist of making the problem harder to crack at different points in the encryption and decryption processes. Some post-quantum algorithms are designed to safeguard the key agreement process, for example, while others ensure quantum-safe authentication thanks to digital signatures.
The technologies comprise an exotic mix of methods -- lattices, polynomials, hashes, isogenies, elliptic curves -- but they share a similar goal: to build algorithms robust enough to be quantum-proof.
The 15 algorithms selected by NIST this year are set to go through another round of review, after which the organisation hopes to standardise some of the proposals. Before 2024, NIST plans to have set up the core of the first post-quantum cryptography standards.
NCSC in the UK and NSA in the US have both made it clear that they will start transitioning to post-quantum cryptography protocols as soon as such standards are in place. But government agencies are not the only organisations showing interest in the field. Vadim Lyubashevsky, from IBM Research's security group, explains that many players in different industries are also patiently waiting for post-quantum cryptography standards to emerge.
"This is becoming a big thing, and I would say certainly that everyone in the relevant industries is aware of it," says Lyubashevsky. "If you're a car manufacturer, for example, you're making plans now for a product that will be built in five years and will be on the road for the next ten years. You have to think 15 years ahead of time, so now you're a bit concerned about what goes in your car."
For IBM's Vadim Lyubashevsky, many players in different industries are patiently waiting for post-quantum cryptography standards to emerge.
Any product that might still be in the market in the next couple of decades is likely to require protection against quantum attacks -- think aeroplanes, autonomous vehicles and trains, but also nuclear plants, IoT devices, banking systems or critical telecommunications infrastructure.
Businesses, in general, have remained quiet about their own efforts to develop post-quantum cryptography processes, but Lyubashevsky is positive that concern is mounting among those most likely to be affected. JP Morgan Chase, for example, recently joined research hub the Chicago Quantum Exchange, mentioning in the process that the bank's research team is "actively working" in the area of post-quantum cryptography.
That is not to say that quantum-safe algorithms should be top-of-mind for every company that deals with potentially sensitive data. "What people are saying right now is that threat could be 20 years away," says Lyubashevsky. "Some information, like my credit card data for example -- I don't really care if it becomes public in 20 years. There isn't a burning rush to switch to post-quantum cryptography, which is why some people aren't pressed to do so right now."
Of course, things might change quickly. Tech giants like IBM are publishing ambitious roadmaps to scale up their quantum-computing capabilities, and the quantum ecosystem is growing at pace. If milestones are achieved, predicts Lyubashevsky, the next few years might act as a wake-up call for decision makers.
SEE: Quantum computing: Photon startup lights up the future of computers and cryptography
Consultancies like security company ISARA are already popping up to provide businesses with advice on the best course of action when it comes to post-quantum cryptography. In a more pessimistic perspective, however, Lyubashevsky points out that it might, in some cases, already be too late.
"It's a very negative point of view," says the IBM researcher, "but in a way, you could argue we've already been hacked. Attackers could be intercepting all of our data and storing it all, waiting for a quantum computer to come along. We could've already been broken -- the attacker just hasn't used the data yet."
Lyubashevsky is far from the only expert to discuss this possibility, and the method even has a name: 'harvest and decrypt'. The practice is essentially an espionage technique, and as such mostly concerns government secrets. Lyubashevsky, for one, is convinced that state-sponsored attackers are already harvesting confidential encrypted information about other nations, and sitting on it in anticipation of a future quantum computer that would crack the data open.
For the researcher, there is no doubt that governments around the world are already preparing against harvest-and-decrypt attacks -- and as reassuring as it would be to think so, there'll be no way to find out for at least the next ten years. One thing is for certain, however: the quantum revolution might deliver some nasty security surprises for unprepared businesses and organisations.
Honeywell fires up the H1, its second-generation quantum computer – CNET
An ion chamber houses the qubit brains of Honeywell's quantum computers.
Honeywell's second-generation quantum computer, the H1, is in business. The powerful computer performs calculations by carefully manipulating 10 ytterbium atoms housed in a thumbnail-size package called an ion trap.
Honeywell, a surprise new entrant intoquantum computers, is one of a several companies hoping to revolutionize computing. Tech giants IBM, Google, Intel and Microsoft also have serious quantum computing programs, and startups such as Rigetti Computing and IonQ are in the fray with their own machines.
Subscribe to the CNET Now newsletter for our editors' picks of the most important stories of the day.
A host of other startups like QC Ware, Zapata, Cambridge Quantum Computing, Rahko, and Xanadu are working to make quantum computers easier to use for those that don't have a bunch of Ph.D.s on staff to wrestle with the weird laws that govern the ultra-small scale of the quantum physics realm.
The continued progress is essential if quantum computers, still in their infancy, are to meet their potential. Years of investments will be required to carry today's early designs to a more practical, profitable phase.
The heart of a quantum computer is called a qubit, a data storage and processing element that unlike conventional computer bits can store an overlapping combination of zero and one through one quantum computing phenomenon called superposition. Honeywell's H1 machine today has 10 qubits, charged ytterbium atoms arranged in a line.
Those qubits can be tickled electromagnetically to change the data they're storing, shift positions and reveal their state to the outside world when a calculation is finished. Qubits can be connected through a phenomenon called entanglement that exponentially increases the number of states a quantum computer can evaluate.
That's why quantum computers promise to be able to crack computing problems that conventional machines can't. One big expected use is molecular modeling to improve chemical processes like fertilizer manufacturing. Quantum computers are also expected to take on other materials science challenges, such as creating efficient solar panels and better batteries. Other uses focus on optimization tasks like overseeing the financial investments and routing a fleet of delivery trucks.
Honeywell pioneered this trapped-ion design with the H0 quantum computer prototype. "Because of demand from partners and customers, we transformed H0 into a commercial system," said Tony Uttley, president of Honeywell Quantum Solutions. Customers who've used H0 include Los Alamos National Laboratory and the University of Texas at Austin, oil-and-gas giant BP and financial services company JPMorgan Chase.
The H0 set a record for an IBM-designed quantum computing speed test called quantum volume, a measure that combines the number of qubits and how much useful work they can accomplish. In August, IBM reached a quantum volume of 64, part of a plan to double performance annually. But in October, Honeywell announced its H0 reached a quantum volume of 128. That's part of its plan to increase performance at least by a factor of 10 annually, reaching 640,000 by 2025.
Honeywell also detailed H2, H3, H4 and H5 quantum computer design plans extending through 2030. They'll replace today's straight-line ion trap with increasingly complicated arrangements, including a looped "racetrack" in the H2 already in testing today and increasingly large crisscrossing lattices for the H3, H4 and H5.
One big motivation for the new designs is cramming in more qubits. That'll be important to move beyond today's kicking-the-tires calculations into more serious work. It'll be essential for one of the big challenges for future quantum computers, error correction, which designers hope will let easily perturbed qubits perform calculations for longer before being derailed.
Go here to see the original:
Honeywell fires up the H1, its second-generation quantum computer - CNET
Quantum Computing Is Bigger Than Donald Trump – WIRED
Just this week the Senate had a hearing, ostensibly about speech on internet platforms. But what the hearing was really about was our continuing inability to figure out what to do with a technological infrastructure that gives every single person on the planet the ability to broadcast their thoughts, whether illuminating or poisonous. We know that solutions are elusive, especially in the context of our current electoral issues. But this is actually one of the less vexing conundrums that technology has dropped on our lap. What are we going to do about Crispr? How are we going to handle artificial intelligence, before it handles us? A not-encouraging sign of our ability to deal with change: While we werent looking, smart phones have made us cyborgs.
Heres another example of a change that might later look more significant than our current focus: Late last year, Google announced it had achieved Quantum Supremacy, This means that it solved a problem with its experimental quantum computer that couldnt be solved with a conventional one, or even a supercomputer.
Its a forgone conclusion that quantum computing is going to happen. When it does, what we thought was a speed limit will evaporate. Nobodynobody!has an idea of what can come from this. I bet it might even be bigger than whatever Donald Trump will do in a second (or third or fourth) term, or the civil disorder that might erupt if he isnt returned to the Peoples House.
A few days after the election, on that same West Coast trip, I had a random street encounter with one of the most important leaders in technology. We spoke informally for maybe 15 or 20 minutes about what had happened. He seemed shattered by the outcome, but no more than pretty much everyone I knew. He told me that he asked himself, should I have done more? Like all of the top people in the industry, he has since had to make his accommodations with the Trump administration. But as with all his peers, he has not relented on his drive to create new technology that will continue the remarkable and worrisome transformation of humanity.
The kind of people who work for him will keep doing what they do. Maybe they will no longer want to work for a company thats overly concerned about winning the favoror avoiding the disfavorof a president who they think is racist, a president who despises immigrants (wife and in-laws excepted), a president who encourages dictators and casts doubts on voting. If things get bad in this country, a lot of those engineers and scientists will leave, and a lot of other countries will welcome them. The adventure will continue. Even if the United States as we know it does not last another generation, scientists will continue advancing artificial intelligence, brain-machine interfaces, and, of course, quantum computing. And thats what our time will be known for.
Yes, a thousand years from now, historians will study the Donald Trump phenomenon and what it meant for our gutsy little experiment in democracy, as well as for the world at large. I am still confident, however, that historians will find more importance in learning about the moments in our lifetimes when science changed everything.
What I am not confident about is predicting how those future historians will do their work, and to what extent people of our time would regard those historians as human beings, or some exotic quantum Crispr-ed cyborgs. Thats something that Donald Trump will have no hand in. And why its so important, even as politics intrude on our everyday existence, to do the work of chronicling this great and fearsome adventure.
Original post:
Quantum Computing Is Bigger Than Donald Trump - WIRED
Quantum Computing Expert Warns Governments May Be First to Crack Algorithms Keeping Bitcoin and the Internet Secure – The Daily Hodl
Applied mathematician Peter Shor says government agencies could be the first to figure out a way to enable quantum computers to break algorithms that keep Bitcoin and the internet secure.
In an interview with Nature Magazine, the MIT professor of applied mathematics talks about the looming possibility that quantum computers can crack encryption keys, called RSA, that keep the internet and cryptocurrencies safe from security threats. Shor says that if theres anyone who can break the RSA first, it will be government bodies such as the National Security Agency (NSA).
The first people who break RSA either are going to be NSA or some other big organization. At first, these computers will be slow. If you have a computer that can only break, say, one RSA key per hour, anything thats not a high priority or a national-security risk is not going to be broken. The NSA has much more important things to use their quantum computer on than reading your e-mail theyll be reading the Chinese ambassadors e-mail.
Crypto enthusiasts are keeping close tabs on developments in the quantum computing space as the technology threatens to break the cryptographic algorithms that keep cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin secure. The World Economic Forum describes how quantum computing machines can crack the existing standards of encryption.
The sheer calculating ability of a sufficiently powerful and error-corrected quantum computer means that public-key cryptography is destined to fail, and would put the technology used to protect many of todays fundamental digital systems and activities at risk.
Recently, industrial powerhouse Honeywell announced that it built the System Model H1 quantum computer, which the company touts generates the highest quantum volume in the entire industry.
As to whether quantum computing poses an existential threat to the crypto industry, Ripple CTO David Schwartz says it could become powerful enough to break cryptographic algorithms within a decade.
I think we have at least eight years. I have very high confidence that its at least a decade before quantum computing presents a threat, but you never know when there could be a breakthrough. Im a cautious and concerned observer, I would say.
Featured Image: Shutterstock/archy13
See the original post here:
Quantum Computing Expert Warns Governments May Be First to Crack Algorithms Keeping Bitcoin and the Internet Secure - The Daily Hodl
Australia’s Archer and its plan for quantum world domination – ZDNet
Archer CEO Dr Mohammad Choucair and quantum technology manager Dr Martin Fuechsle
Quantum computing will revolutionise the world; its potential is so immeasurable that the greatest minds in Redmond, Armonk, and Silicon Valley are spending big on quantum development. But a company by the name of Archer Materials wants to put Sydney, Australia, on the map alongside, if not ahead, of these tech giants.
Universal quantum computers leverage the quantum mechanical phenomena of superposition and entanglement to create states that scale exponentially with the number of quantum bits (qubits).
Here's an explanation: What is quantum computing? Understanding the how, why and when of quantum computers
"Quantum computing represents the next generation of powerful computing, you don't really have to know how your phone works on the inside, you just want it to do things that you couldn't do before," Archer CEO Dr Mohammad Choucair told ZDNet.
"And with quantum computing, you can do things that you couldn't necessarily do before."
There is currently a very small set number of tasks that a quantum computer can do, but Choucair is hopeful that in the future this will grow to be a little bit more consumer-based and business-faced.
Right now, however, quantum computing, for all intents and purposes, is at a very early stage. It's not going to completely displace a classical computer, but it will give the capacity to do more with what we currently have. Choucair believes this will positively impact a range of sectors that are reliant on an increasing amount of computational power.
"This comes to light when you start to want to optimise very large portfolios, or perform a whole bunch of data crunching, AI and all sorts of buzzwords -- but ultimately, you're looking for more computational power. And you can genuinely get speed-ups in computational power based on certain algorithms for certain problems that are currently being identified," he explained.
"The problems that quantum computers can solve are currently being identified and the end users are being engaged."
Archer describes itself as a materials technology company. Its proposition is simple at heart: "Materials are the tangible physical basis of all technology. We're developing and integrating materials to address complex global challenges in quantum technology, human health, and reliable energy".
There are many components to quantum computing, but Archer is building a qubit processor. 12CQ is touted by the company as a "world-first technology that Archer aims to build for quantum computing operation at room-temperature and integration onboard modern electronic devices".
"We're not building the entire computer, we're building the chipset, the processer at the core of it," Choucair told ZDNet. "That really forms the brain of a quantum computer.
"The difference with us is that we really are looking at on-board use, rather than the heavy infrastructure that's required to house the existing quantum computing architectures.
"This is not all airy-fairy and it is not all of blue sky; it's real, there's proven potential, we've published the workwe have the data, we have the science behind us -- it took seven years of immense, immersive R&D."
Archer is building the chip inside a AU$180 million prototype foundry out of the University of Sydney. The funding was provided by the university as well as government.
"Everyone's playing their role to get this to market," he said.
Choucair is convinced that the potential when Archer "gets this right" will be phenomenal.
"Once you get a minimal viable product, and you can demonstrate the technology can indeed work at room temperature and be integrated into modern-day electronics. I think that's, that's quite disruptive. And it's quite exciting," he said.
Magnified region observing the round qubit clusters which are billionths of a meter in size in the centre of qubit control device components (appearing as parallel lines).
Choucair found himself at Archer in 2017 after the company acquired a startup he founded. Straight away, he and the board got started on the strategy it's currently executing on.
"There is very, very small margin for error from the start, in the middle, at the end -- you need to know what you're getting yourself into, what you're doingthis is why I think we've been able to be so successful moving forward, we've been so rapid in our development, because we know exactly what needs to get done," Choucair said.
"The chip is a world firstscience can fail at any stage, everybody knows that, but more often than not, it may or may not -- how uncertain do you want something to be? So for us, the more and more we develop our chip, the higher chances of success become."
Read more about Archer's commercial strategy here: Archer looks to commercialisation future with graphene-based biosensor tech
Choucair said materials technology itself was able to reduce a lot of the commercial barriers to entry for Archer, which meant the company could take the work out of the university much sooner.
"The material technology allowed us to do things without the need for heavy cooling infrastructure, which costs millions and millions of dollars and had to be housed in buildings that cost millions and millions of dollars,' he explained. "Massive barrier reduced, material could be made simply from common laboratory agents, which means you didn't have to build a billion-dollar facility to control atoms and do all these crazy scientific things at the atomic level.
"And so, really, you end up with the materials technology that was simple to handle, easy to make, and worked at room temperature, and you're like, wow, okay, so now the job for us is to actually build the chip and miniaturise this stuff, which is challenging in itself."
The CEO of the unexplainable has an impressive resum. He landed at Archer with a strong technical background in nanotechnology, served a two-year mandate on the World Economic Forum Global Council for Advanced Materials, is a fellow of both The Royal Society of New South Wales and The Royal Australian Chemical Institute, and was an academic and research fellow at the University of Sydney's School of Chemistry.
Choucair also has in his armoury Dr Martin Fuechsle, who is recognised for developing the world's smallest transistor, a "single-atom transistor".
"Fuechsle is among the few highly talented physicists in the world capable of building quantum devices that push the boundaries of current information processing technology," Choucair said in January 2019, announcing Fuechsle's appointment. "His skills, experience, and exceptional track record strongly align to Archer's requirements for developing our key vertical of quantum technology."
SEE:Guide to Becoming a Digital Transformation Champion(TechRepublic Premium)
Archer is publicly listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, but Choucair would reject any claims of it being a crazy proposition.
"20 years ago, a company that was maybe offering something as abstract as an online financial payment system would have been insane too, but if you have a look at the top 10 companies on the Nasdaqa lot of their core business is embedded in the development of computational architecture, computational hardware," he said.
"We're a very small company, I'm not comparing myself to a Nasdaq-listed company. I'm just saying, the core businessI think it's a unique offering and differentiates us on a stock exchange."
He said quantum technology is something that people are starting to value and see as having potential and scale of opportunity.
Unlike many of the other quantum players in Australia and abroad, Archer is not a result of a spin-off from a university, Choucair claimed.
"The one thing about Archer is that we're not a university spin out -- I think that's what sets us apart, not just in Australia, but globally," he said. "A lot of the time, the quantum is at a university, this is where you go to learn about quantum computing, so it's only natural that it does come out of a university."
Historically, Australia has a reputation of being bad at commercialising research and development. But our curriculum vitae speaks for itself: Spray-on skin, the black box flight recorder, polymer bank notes, and the Cochlear implant, to name a few.
According to Choucair, quantum is next.
"We really are leading the world; we well and truly punch above our weight when it comes to the work that's been done, we lead the world," he said.
"And that quantum technology is across quantum computing and photonics, and sensing -- it's not just quantum computing. We do have a lot of great scientists and those who are developing the technology."
But as highlighted in May by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) in its quantum technologies roadmap, there are a lot of gaps that need to be filled over the long term.
"We just have to go out there and get the job done," Choucair said.
"In Australia we have resource constraints, just like anywhere else in the world. And I think there's always a lot more that can be donewe're not doing deep tech as a luxury in this country. From the very top down, there is an understanding, I believe, from our government and from key institutes in the nation that this is what will help us drive forward as a nation."
Archer isn't the only group focused on the promise of quantum tech down under, but Choucair said there's no animosity within the Aussie ecosystem.
Read about UNSW's efforts: Australia's ambitious plan to win the quantum race
There's also a partnership between two universities: UNSW and Sydney Uni quantum partnership already bearing fruit
"I think we all understand that there's a greater mission at stake here. And we all want, I can't speak on everyone's behalf, but at Archer we definitely have vision of making quantum computing widespread -- adopted by consumers and businesses, that's something that we really want to do," he said.
"We have fantastic support here in Australia, there's no doubt about it."
A lot of the work in the quantum space is around education, as Choucair said, it's not something that just comes out of abstractness and then just exists.
"You have to remember this stuff's all been built off 20, 30, 40 years of research and development, quantum mechanics, engineering, science, and tech -- hundreds and thousands of brilliant minds over the course of two-three generations," the CEO explained.
While the technology is here, and people are building algorithms that only run on quantum computers, there is still another 20-or-so years of development to follow.
"This field is not a fast follower field, you don't just get up in the morning and put your slippers on and say you're going to build a quantum computer," he added.
Archer is also part of the IBM Q Network, which is a global network of startups, Fortune 500 companies, and academic research institutes that have access to IBM's experts, developer tools, and cloud-based quantum systems through IBM Q Cloud.
Archer joined the network in May as the first Australian company that's developing a qubit processor.
Choucair said the work cannot be done without partnerships and collaboration alongside the best in the world.
"Yes, there is a race to build quantum computers, but I think more broadly than a race, to just enable the widespread adoption of the technology. And that's not easy. And that takes a concerted effort," he said. "And at this early stage of development, there is a lot of overlap and collaboration.
"There's a bit of a subculture that Australia can't do it -- yeah, we can.
"There's no excuses, right? We're doing it, we're building it, we're getting there. We're working with the very best in the world."
View post:
Australia's Archer and its plan for quantum world domination - ZDNet
Will Quantum Mechanics Produce the True Thinking Computer? – Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence
Some hope that quantum mechanics can explain human consciousness.
Maybe we are all quantum computers but dont know it? Maybe quantum computers could think like people?
There is an odd relationship between the human mind and quantum mechanics, the science of entities like electrons that are too small to be governed by ordinary physics.
Some aspects of consciousness appear to be mediated by such elementary particles. Science writer Philip Ball explains,
Nobody understands what consciousness is or how it works. Nobody understands quantum mechanics either. Could that be more than coincidence?
Quantum mechanics is the best theory we have for describing the world at the nuts-and-bolts level of atoms and subatomic particles. Perhaps the most renowned of its mysteries is the fact that the outcome of a quantum experiment can change depending on whether or not we choose to measure some property of the particles involved
To this day, physicists do not agree on the best way to interpret these quantum experiments, and to some extent what you make of them is (at the moment) up to you. But one way or another, it is hard to avoid the implication that consciousness and quantum mechanics are somehow linked.
This might, of course, be at least one part of the reason that consciousness remains a mystery.
But now, is a quantum computer smarter than the conventional machine that just computes numbers?
In Gaming AI, tech philosopher George Gilder notes that the resourceful AI geniuses believe that they can effect an astronomical speedup by changing the ordinary 1 or 0 bit to the quantum bit, or qubit:
The qubit is one of the most enigmatic tangles of matter and ghost in the entire armament of physics. Like a binary digit, it can register 0 or 1; what makes it quantum is that it can also register a nonbinary superposition of 0 and 1.
But before we get carried away by the possibilities, Gilder goes on to say that theres a hitch. An endless superposition works fine for Schrodingers cat. But, to be useful in the real world, the quantum computer must settle on either 0 or 1. If the needed number is your paycheck, to be cashed, it must be a number, not an infinite debate.
In any event, quantum computers come with real world problems that conventional computers dont have:
the chip can no longer function as a determinist logical device. For example, today the key problem in microchips is to avoid spontaneous quantum tunneling, where electrons can find themselves on the other side of a barrier that by the laws of classical physics would have been insurmountable and impenetrable. In digital memory chips or processors, spontaneous tunneling can mean leakage and loss.
Quantum computing has advantages and disadvantages. In any event, consciousness is still a mystery and its not clear at this point how quantum computers help us understand much. But stay tuned!
Note: You can download Gaming AI for free here.
You may also wish to look at:
Quantum supremacy isnt the Big Fix. If human thought is Turings halting oracle, as seems likely, then even quantum computing will not allow us to replicate human intelligence (Eric Holloway)
Excerpt from:
Will Quantum Mechanics Produce the True Thinking Computer? - Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence
Strategic Partnership will aid smooth work in the event of regional crisis: Australia High Commissioner – The Hindu
Artificial Intelligence, 5G, rare earth products, ground station tracking facilities to support Gaganyaan are among the areas covered, says Barry OFarell
Australian High Commissioner to India Barry OFarrell took charge a month before the COVID-19 pandemic struck in India, yet his time here has seen a steady uptick in the momentum of bilateral cooperation including a Prime Ministerial summit in June and, more recently, Australias inclusion in the Malabar naval exercises. He speaks toNarayan Lakshman about a range of cooperative initiatives on the anvil.
It will demonstrate the ability of our navy to work through exercises, warfare serials and like with the navies of India, Australia, the U.S. and Japan. That is important because, were there to be a regional crisis, like a natural or humanitarian disaster, the ability to work smoothly with partners is critical. It builds particularly on the maritime agreement that was one of the agreements underneath the CSP, but also to the mutual logistic support arrangement, which is designed to improve the collaboration between our armed forces. This reflects the commitment that Quad partners have to a free, open, and prosperous Indo Pacific. It demonstrates the commitment that Australia and India have to what Prime Minister Modi described at the June summit as a sacred duty to provide the neighbourhood with the environment where people could prosper, where there could be stability upon which to build your lives, and where you could live freely. It reiterates that.
It also comes off the back of ongoing interactions between our armed forces. To some extent, Malabar was a fixation that we are delighted to be part of, but it was a fixation because it ignored the fact that the AusIndex exercise last year was the largest naval engagement Australia had ever been a part of, and most complex involving submarine serials and P-8 Poseidon maritime patrols across the Bay of Bengal. Equally, the recent passage exercise again demonstrated our ability to work together, including practising warfare serials on water. All these things increase the level of cooperation, increase the significance of the relationship, but practically ensure that should they be called upon, our navies could work more closely together, effectively, in support of a peaceful, stable and prosperous Indo Pacific.
Also read: India-Australia friendship based on trust, respect: Scott Morrison
Certainly, the COVID-19 pandemic has damaged economies. It has accelerated geostrategic competition, and it has obviously disrupted our way of life. It has highlighted the importance, to countries like India and Australia, of ensuring a safe, secure and prosperous future for our citizens. Thats why, as part of the CSP, there were agreements in relation to critical technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, quantum computing and 5G because we recognise the opportunities they present to people, to businesses, to the broader economy, and the fact that they should be guarded by international standards to ensure they do not present risks, to security or prosperity. The Australia-India framework Arrangements on Cyber and Cyber Enabled Critical Technology cooperation, abbreviated as the Arrangement, will enhance bilateral cooperation. Under the agreement, we are going to cooperate together to promote and preserve that open, free, safe and secure Internet by working around those international norms and rules that we talk about. It sets out practical ways to promote and enhance digital trade, harness critical technologies, and address cyber security challenges. It provides a programme of 66 crore over four years for an Australia-India cyber and critical technology partnership to support research by institutions in both Australia and between institutions in Australia and India. We also signed an MoU on critical minerals between both countries because they are the essential inputs into these critical and emerging technologies, which cover areas like high tech electronics, telecommunications, clean energy, transport and defence. Critical minerals are essential if India wants to achieve its energy mission goal in the battery industry, storage industry and electric vehicle industry.
Editorial | A new dimension: On India-U.S.-Australia-Japan Quadrilateral
If you want to build batteries or electric vehicles, lithium, amongst other items, is required. We know that your northern neighbour is your most significant supplier of these critical minerals. We know that India is seeking to become more self-reliant. We know that imports from China are reducing. Australia potentially sees an opportunity for us to provide elements into Indias efforts to improve its manufacturing, defence and electric vehicle and energy mission projects. We have Indian companies who are currently owning or significant investors in Australian critical minerals and rare earths companies. We have just released a new prospectus on critical minerals and rare earths which lists over 200 projects capable of attracting more investment into India.
I know theres concern in some parts of the community that self-reliance means protectionism. Well, we believe, firstly, that that is not the case, and that there will always be markets in India for elements that can be used by India to grow economies, grow businesses and provide more jobs and more wealth into society. But secondly, if you were concerned about the protectionist angle, the fact is that there is nothing stopping you coming to Australia to buy a mine to put those resources, those elements, into your own businesses, in the same way as is happening with coalfield in Queensland.
Also read: Malabar 2020: the coming together of the Quad in the seas
Firstly, Australia is already contributing to Indias national quantum mission by facilitating partnerships with universities, research institutions and businesses. That includes one of the best relationships we have with India, which is the Australian India Strategic Research Fund, which has been going for over 20 years. Since 2013, one of our Australians of the Year, Professor Michelle Simmons, has led a team of researchers at New South Wales Universitys (UNSW) Centre for Quantum Computation and Communication Technology, seeking to build the first quantum computer in silicon.
For quantum computers to be successful with their calculations, they have to be 100% accurate, but electrical interference called charge noise gets in the way. To tackle this problem, the UNSW has used a Research Fund from that Australia India Strategic Research Fund to collaborate with the Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, to combine Australias state of the art fabrication facilities, and Indias ultra-sensitive noise measurement apparatus. This has helped identify how and where the fabrication process should be adjusted. Earlier this year, the UNSW team was able to achieve a 99.99% accuracy in their atomic level silicon prototype. They believe it is only a matter of time before theyre able to demonstrate 100% reliability, and produce a 10 qubit prototype quantum integrated processor, hopefully by 2023. This has the potential to revolutionise virtually every industry, solving problems and processing information that would take a conventional computer millions of years to calculate in seconds. This is practical cooperation between the UNSW and the Institute in Bangalore, going on right now ready to hopefully come to practical fruition in 2023. Equally, in the upcoming Bengaluru Tech Summit we will host an exclusive session providing an overview of our innovative ecosystem, our cyber and critical technology capabilities, growing space ambitions, and the applications of computing, and quantum computing. Professor Simmons will be one of the keynote speakers. We recommend tuning into 11 a.m. on Friday November 20 for the session From Cyberspace to Outer Space: Innovating with Australia in a Post-COVID World. The bottom line is that India and Australia, through two respected institutions, are close to cracking something nowhere else in the world has been cracked, and it is likely to be ready within the next three years.
Firstly, we have a space sector going back to back to 1967. We launched our first rocket in South Australia and Woomera in 1967. But we were also critical to NASA throughout, regarding the use of space as part of NASAs global space infrastructure. We received those pictures from the first moon landing and broadcast them to the world. The U.S.s two systems failed and ours didnt fail on camera, and thats why we had pictures of Neil Armstrong walking on the moon. We have facilitated communication with deep space probes and also the landing craft on Mars.
Australia and India have been cooperating together as countries since 1987, when we inked our first MoU, and there is a strong engagement between ISRO and Australian agencies. We have undertaken data collaboration on Indian remote satellites. Since 2013, we have been doing laser ranging for Indian regional navigational satellite systems. We launched an Australian satellite by an Australian company and of course, we look forward to your manned space mission in 2022. We are exploring how we can place temporary ground station tracking facilities in Australia to support that Gaganyaan Mission. That is something that is practically under way as we speak. But we have been impressed by Indias capabilities and ambitions in space. You have the record for the most number of satellites released by a single rocket ever. It was more than 100 in 2017.
A lot of the universities are using the online option. As someone whos been coming to India for 10 years, initially I did notice a resistance to online education. Like the other technologies that were finally using during COVID, that resistance has been broken down. I confirmed that with the Director of the Indian Institute of Technology, IIT Madras. But we recognise that it is face-to-face learning, like face-to-face working, is still what most people want. A number of Australian States are starting pilot programmes to demonstrate that students can be picked up and returned to Australia into campuses safely given the COVID spread. And my Education Minister Dan Tehan made the point two weeks ago that the Australian government is keen for that to happen as soon as possible. The latest part to be announced was one from South Australia that will fly students out of Singapore into Australia. There was an early one announced by the Northern Territory. On the back of those, there is a hope that we will be able to return students to Australia for Day One, Term One, next year. But it will depend on those State trials. It is a bit like our approach to opening up bubbles with other countries: we would like to see things being done in situ, in practice, in real time to show that it can succeed. If the trials are successful, I remain confident about next year.
The challenge at the present time is that both countries have international flight bans. The only flights operating between both countries are repatriation flights. Malaysia and Singapore, which were the two countries in pre-COVID times where passengers could transit to get to Australia or to come to India, are not accepting Indian citizens. But that in no way undermines Australias desire to resume whatever is going to be business as usual, in relation to tertiary education.
Australian State governments and our education institutions themselves have put a lot of effort into looking after those Indian students who were stranded in Australia due to the COVID-19 crisis. Some of them are people that have had to wait a month or two until the Vande Bharat planes started. Having graduated mid-year, they have now hopefully most of them flying home, while others are still continuing their studies. Whilst, like many places at the start of COVID-19, there were a few teething problems, Im delighted to say a combination of State and federal governments and the universities and the Indian community there have been supportive of Indian students in Australia.
The rest is here:
Strategic Partnership will aid smooth work in the event of regional crisis: Australia High Commissioner - The Hindu
Valuation of quantum computer maker D-Wave slashed by more than half after company struggles to raise financing – The Globe and Mail
D-Wave has fallen short of financial targets and only had a handful of buyers for its expensive, shed-sized computers.
STEPHEN LAM/REUTERS
One of Canadas most heavily funded early stage technology companies, quantum computer developer D-Wave Systems, undertook a costly refinancing this year that wiped out most of the value of some long-time investors, including the U.S. Central Intelligence Agencys venture capital arm, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and fund giant Fidelity Investments, according to public filings and three sources.
The US$40-million financing, including US$10-million from new investor NEC Corp., came as part of a capital restructuring that cut D-Waves valuation to less than US$170-million before the receipt of funds, down from about US$450-million, the sources familiar with the company said. The Globe and Mail is not disclosing their identities as they are not authorized to speak on the matter.
Existing investors who participated including Montreal-based Public Sector Pension Investment Board (D-Waves top shareholder, with $100-million-plus invested to date), Business Development Bank of Canada and Goldman Sachs maintained their relative stakes, limiting the writedown of their holdings. Those that didnt, including the CIAs In-Q-Tel arm, Mr. Bezos and Fidelity, saw their stakes significantly devalued, by upward of 85 per cent in some cases.
Story continues below advertisement
The funding was undertaken during a transformational year for Burnaby, B.C.-based D-Wave, the leader in a global race to develop computers whose chips draw their power by harnessing natural properties of subatomic particles to perform complex calculations faster than conventional computers.
Despite raising more than US$300-million from investors to date, D-Wave has fallen short of financial targets and only had a handful of buyers for its expensive, shed-sized computers, which were mainly used by researchers to tinker with cutting-edge technology. D-Wave has generated just more than US$75-million of customer contracts in its 21 years.
Meanwhile, newer quantum computer startups are attracting buzz and financing, while giants including IBM, Intel and Google continue to develop their own quantum computers.
This year, D-Wave promoted Silicon Valley veteran executive Alan Baratz to chief executive officer, replacing Vern Brownell, to step up efforts to commercialize its technology. It parted ways with several other top executives, including its chief financial officer and senior vice-president responsible for applications and technology. Long-time board members Steve Jurvetson, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, and ex-Cisco executive Don Listwin also left.
Mr. Baratz has earned praise from investors for shifting D-Waves strategy away from selling computers, which listed for US$15-million, in favour of offering internet access to the machines. With the recent launch of its latest processor and updated software and service offerings, D-Wave says it can help companies solve real-world business problems and deliver business value.
The company has never looked better," said Rick Nathan, managing director with Kensington Capital Partners, a D-Wave investor. "After all this time, it now feels like [D-Wave] has achieved real product market fit and is scaling with its customers. This is new, and as a long-time investor, it is great to see.
But D-Wave is still not financially self-sustaining. It was on the verge of raising significant funds from a Chinese investor that backed out when Canadian authorities arrested a top executive of Chinas Huawei Technologies in 2018. Existing investors subsequently injected US$30-million in 2019 to tide D-Wave over, but after it struggled to find new backers other than NEC, they stepped up again at the much reduced valuation.
Story continues below advertisement
D-Wave declined to comment. But evidence of the financial hit surfaced in recent public disclosures by some investors.
Regulatory filings from PenderFund Capital Managements Working Opportunity Fund show D-Wave dropped to its 11th largest investment as of June 30 from its second-largest before. The fund didnt say why, but separately disclosed it had cut the carrying value of one of its private holdings, likely D-Wave, by $22.6-million after the unidentified company did a significant equity financing at a lower [valuation] level" than prior financings.
Fidelitys annual report shows three funds that had invested $18.3-million in D-Wave valued their combined stakes at $3.1-million as of June 30, down 85.6 per cent from a year earlier. A Fidelity spokesman declined to comment.
Meanwhile, U.S. fund manager 180 Degree Capital cut the value of its D-Wave stake to US$1.2 million from US$7.7 million on Dec. 31. The U.S. fund manager paid US$5.7-million for its stake from 2008 to 2014. In a call with 180 Degree investors on Aug. 11, president Daniel Wolfe said the writedown was directly related to a financing event that repriced the company. Also, 180 Degree further revealed that D-Wave in April consolidated all outstanding shares into one class of preferred stock in a new holding company, DWSI Holdings Inc., and completed a 1-for-5 reverse stock split.
Mr. Wolfe said D-Wave has not performed, and its value has dropped materially and that fundraising has been very difficult. Sales have been difficult. But he added he was very bullish on Mr. Baratzs ability to lead [D-Wave] to the next level.
Your time is valuable. Have the Top Business Headlines newsletter conveniently delivered to your inbox in the morning or evening. Sign up today.
The rest is here:
Valuation of quantum computer maker D-Wave slashed by more than half after company struggles to raise financing - The Globe and Mail
60-year-old limit to lasers overturned by quantum researchers – Griffith News
A team of Australian quantum theorists has shown how to break a bound that had been believed, for 60 years, to fundamentally limit the coherence of lasers.
The coherence of a laser beam can be thought of as the number of photons (particles of light) emitted consecutively into the beam with the same phase (all waving together). It determines how well it can perform a wide variety of precision tasks, such as controlling all the components of a quantum computer.
Now, in a paper published inNature Physics, the researchers from Griffith University and Macquarie University have shown that new quantum technologies open the possibility of making this coherence vastly larger than was thought possible.
The conventional wisdom dates back to a famous 1958 paper by American physicists Arthur Schawlow and Charles Townes, said Professor Howard Wiseman, projectleaderand Director of Griffiths Centre for Quantum Dynamics.
Each of them went on to win a Nobel prize for their laser work.
They showed theoretically that the coherence of the beam cannot be greater than the square of the number of photons stored in the laser, he said.
But they made assumptions about how energy is added to the laser and how it is released to form the beam.
The assumptions made sense at the time, and still apply to most lasers today, but they are not required by quantum mechanics.
In our paper, we have shown that the true limit imposed by quantum mechanics is that the coherence cannot be greater than the fourth power of the number of photons stored in the laser, said Associate Professor Dominic Berry, from Macquarie University.
When the stored number of photons is large, as is typically the case, our new upper bound is much bigger than the old one.
But can this new bound on coherence be achieved?
Yes, says Dr NarimanSaadatmand, a researcher inProfessorWisemans group.
By numerical simulation we have found a quantum mechanical model for a laser which achieves the theoretical upper bound for coherence, in a beam that is otherwise indistinguishable from that of a conventional laser.
So,when we will see these new super-lasers?
Probably not for a while, says Mr Travis Baker, the PhD student on the project at Griffith University.
But we do prove that it would be possible to construct our truly quantum-limited laser using superconducting technology. This is the same technology used in the current best quantum computers, and our proposed device may have applications in that field.
Our work raises many interesting questionssuch as whether it could allow more energy-efficient lasers, Professor Wiseman said.
That would also be a great benefit, so we hope to able to investigate that in the future.
Excerpt from:
60-year-old limit to lasers overturned by quantum researchers - Griffith News
A Measured Approach to Regulating Fast-Changing Tech – Harvard Business Review
Executive Summary
Innovations driving what many refer to as the Fourth Industrial Revolution are as varied as the enterprises affected. Industries and their supply chains are already being revolutionized by several emerging technologies, including 5G networks, artificial intelligence, and advanced robotics, all of which make possible new products and services that are both better and cheaper than current offerings. Unfortunately, not every application of transformational technology is as obviously beneficial to individuals or society as a whole. But rather than panic, regulators will need to step back, and balance costs and benefits rationally.
Amid the economic upheaval caused by Covid-19, technology-driven disruption continues to transform nearly every business at an accelerating pace, from entertainment to shopping to how we work and go to school. Though the crisis may be temporary, many changes in consumer behavior are likely permanent.
Well before the pandemic, however, industries and their supply chains were already being revolutionized by several emerging technologies, including 5G networks, artificial intelligence, and advanced robotics, all of which make possible new products and services that are both better and cheaper than current offerings. That kind of big bang disruption can quickly and repeatedly rewrite the rules of engagement for incumbents and new entrants alike. But is the world changing too fast? And, if so, are governments capable of regulating the pace and trajectory of disruption?
The answers to those questions vary by industry, of course. Thats because the innovations driving what many refer to as the Fourth Industrial Revolution are as varied as the enterprises affected. In my recent book, Pivot to the Future, my co-authors and I identified ten transformative technologies with the greatest potential to generate new value for consumers, which is the only measure of progress that really matters. They are: extended reality, cloud computing, 3D printing, advanced human-computer interactions, quantum computing, edge and fog computing, artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, blockchain, and smart robotics.
Some of these disruptors, such as blockchain, robotics, 3D printing and the Internet of things, are already in early commercial use. For others, the potential applications may be even more compelling, though the business cases for reaching them are less obvious. Today, for example, only the least risk-adverse investors are funding development in virtual reality, edge computing, and new user interface technologies that interpret and respond to brainwaves.
Complicating both investment and adoption of transformative technologies is the fact that the applications with the biggest potential to change the world will almost certainly be built on unanticipated combinations of several novel and mature innovations. Think of the way ride-sharing services require existing GPS services, mobile networks, and devices, or how video conferencing relies on home broadband networks and high-definition displays. Looking at just a few of the most exciting examples of things to come make clear just how unusual the next generation of disruptive combinations will be, and how widespread their potential impact on business-as-usual:
Unfortunately, not every application of transformational technology is as obviously beneficial to individuals or society as a whole. Every one of the emerging technologies we identified (and plenty of those already in mainstream use) come with potential negative side effects that may, in some cases, outweigh the benefits. Often, these costs are both hard to predict and difficult to measure.
As disruption accelerates, so too does anxiety about its unintended consequences, feeding what futurist Alvin Toffler first referred to half a century ago as Future Shock. Tech boosters and critics alike are increasingly appealing to governments to intervene, both to promote the most promising innovations and, at the same time, to solve messy social and political conflicts aggravated by the technology revolution.
On the plus side, governments continue to support research and development of emerging technologies, serving as trial users of the most novel applications. The White House, for example, recently committed over $1 billion for continued exploration of leading-edge innovation in artificial intelligence and quantum computing. The Federal Communications Commission has just concluded one its most successful auctions yet for mobile radio frequencies, clearing bandwidth once considered useless for commercial use but now seen as central to nationwide 5G deployments. Palantir, a data analytics company that works closely with governments to assess terrorism and other complex risks, has just filed for a public offering that values the start-up at over $40 billion.
At the same time, a regulatory backlash against technology continues to gain momentum, with concerns about surveillance, the digital divide, privacy, and disinformation leading lawmakers to consider restricting or even banning some of the most popular applications. And the increasingly strategic importance of continued innovation to global competitiveness and national security has fueled increasingly nasty trade disputes, including some between the U.S., China, and the European Union.
Together with on-going antitrust inquiries into the competitive behavior of leading technology providers, these negative reactions underscore what author Adam Thierer sees as the growing prevalence of techno-panics generalized fears about personal autonomy, the fate of democratic government, and perhaps even apocalyptic outcomes from letting some emerging technologies run free.
Disruptive innovation is not a panacea, but nor is it a poison. As technology transforms more industries and becomes the dominant driver of the global economy, it is inevitable both that users will grow more ambivalent, and, as a result, that regulators will become more involved. If, as a popular metaphor of the 1990s had it, the digital economy began as a lawless frontier akin to the American West, its no surprise that as settlements grow socially complex and economically powerful, the law will continue to play catch up, likely for better and for worse.
But rather than panic, regulators need to step back, and balance costs and benefits rationally. Thats the only way well achieve the exciting promise of todays transformational technologies, but still avoid the dystopias.
Go here to see the original:
A Measured Approach to Regulating Fast-Changing Tech - Harvard Business Review