Nov 19th 2020
AMERICA HAS long dominated the world in information technology (IT). Its government, universities and enterprising spirit have provided it with decades of leadership in hardware and software. Its military drones, satellites and system of systems give its armed forces a powerful edge over those of any competitor. Silicon Valley is more visited by foreign dignitaries and finders-of-fact than any other business locale in the world. One of its tech giants is currently worth over $2trn; three more are worth over $1trn. The contribution technology makes to the buoyancy of its markets is without equal.
China, too, has digital resources in abundance, not least its huge population of 1.4bn, which means it will eventually boast an even deeper pool of data and experts to develop AI models. The countrys digital giants, from Alibaba to Tencent, have already become AI and cloud-computing powers in their own right. Its people live online to an extent that Americansmany of whom still have cheque booksdo not. The countrys Great Firewall keeps undesirable digital content out. Within the wall, tech firms are allowed to fight it out as long as they are happy helpers of Chinas surveillance state.
And China is on the move. It is investing billions in emerging technologies, from AI and chip fabrication to quantum computing and 5G, a new generation of mobile networks. It is hacking other countries computer systems and grabbing intellectual property where it can. It is packing the organisations that develop global technical rules, such as the International Telecommunication Union. And it is pulling other countries into its orbit with initiatives such as the digital Silk Road, helping them build out their digital infrastructure.
President Donald Trump saw, correctly, that this made China a serious challenger to Americas digital supremacy. His humbling of Huawei, a Chinese telecoms-equipment maker, has begun a decoupling of Chinese and American IT infrastructures and of the supply chains between China and America that will continue.
Many device-makers have already moved part of their production out of China and some will end up with two separate supply chains. Apples contract manufacturers, for instance, are setting up plants in India. TSMC, a Taiwanese chip firm, announced in May that it will build a facility in Arizona. Feeling its dependence on American semiconductor technology, China is doubling down on efforts to build its own. In software and other areas, too, bifurcation has begunand not just because of bans against Chinese apps.
What Mr Trump was unable or unwilling to understand, though, was that China and America are not the only economies that matter in this contest, and that fact provides America with a potentially decisive advantage. India, the European Union, Japan and others all play crucial roles in the worlds IT systemas do tech giants such as Alphabet, Apple and Microsoft.
All these entities, whether national or corporate, are at odds with the American government and often with each other over something or other in the IT world, whether it be visas, privacy rights or competition complaints. But they would also all prefer a world in which international agreements, practices and expectations for IT embody the values and interests they share with America, rather than those of China. And if democratic countries cannot agree on common rules in the digital realm, China could end up setting the rules for large swathes of the world. The result would be a technosphere engineered for the comfort and support of autocracies.
A partial catalogue of the past few months disagreements shows the fractiousness that stops the free world coming together on thisand how many opportunities for dealmaking there would be if it decided it should. Americas commerce department told foreign firms they could sell no more chips made using American technology to Huawei; its justice department filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google. America also pulled out of talks at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), a club of mostly rich countries, about how to tax the tech giants. India blocked dozens of Chinese apps, including TikTok, a popular video-sharing service, which the American government also wants to ban. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) struck down the Privacy Shield agreement between America and the European Union (EU), thus throwing the legal basis on which personal data flows across the Atlantic into doubt.
Europe has been trying for some time to carve out its own space in the digital realm as a protector of the citizenrya noble goal made easier by the fact that the companies from which its citizens are being protected are mostly based the other side of the ocean. This has heightened tensions between Brussels, Washington and Silicon Valley. The ECJs ruling on the Privacy Shield is one example. The European Commission is drafting legislation that would weaken the power of Americas tech giants. Its proposed Digital Services Act would outlaw some of the firms business practices, such as bundling their services to take over new markets or displaying them more prominently than competing ones.
Some of the EUs member states have also begun defending their right to rule their own digital roost, something now called digital sovereignty. There is talk of creating a European cloud within the American one. GAIA-X is a step down that roada federation of clouds, launched by Germany and France in June, whose members agree to certain rules, such as allowing customers to choose where their data are stored and move freely to providers competitors if they wish. There is more to come: a data strategy on the table in Brussels would, if fully implemented, create data spaces ruled by European law and give people more rights on how their data are used.
These disputes offer ample space for mutually beneficial trade-offs. If America and its allies can reach good enough accommodations on the most contentious issuesnotably privacy and competitionand find ways to live with the smaller contradictions and conflicts which remain, they can become a force to be reckoned withone that others will need little encouragement to join. An insular America can remain a technology superpower. A connected America cemented into the rest of the world by means of a grand technopolitical bargain could be the hub of something truly unsurpassable.
There is a range of ideas about how to do this. In a recent report for the Council on Foreign Relations, a think-tank, Robert Knake imagines such a grand bargain taking the form of a digital trade zone, complete with a treaty organisation. America would weaponise its digital trade relationships in order to promote such things as cyber-security, privacy protection and democratic values on the internet. Only countries that comply with the organisations rules on such matters would be able to become members and only members would be allowed fully to trade with each other digitally. Violations would be dealt with by imposing sanctions and tariffs. If the digital trade zone grows strong enough, China might see more benefit to co-operative engagement than to continued disruptive behaviour, writes Mr Knake.
Others prefer to imagine something less formal, rules-based and punitive. In October three other think-tanksthe Centre for a New American Security (CNAS), MERICS of Germany and the Asia-Pacific Initiative of Japanoutlined a less exclusive construction. They propose that democratic countries form a technology alliance not subject to a formal treaty. It would be like the G7, which consists of America, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan, and could one day, perhaps, include India and other countries from the Global South. It would hold regular meetings, as the IMF and World Bank do, and issue consensus opinions, and it would invite other stakeholdersfrom NGOs to tech firmsto pitch in.
Until this month, such ideas seemed premature. But with Joe Biden soon in the White House, they have become more realistic: IT will be high on the agenda of the summit of democracies he has promised to convene. Closer co-ordination and some new institutions to back it up are also more needed, and not just because of the Chinese threat. The coronavirus, by pushing much of human activity into the cloud, has emphasised the importance of the digital realm and its governance. Left alone, the world of technology will continue to disintegrate into a splinternet in which digital protectionism is widespreadmuch as the global financial system fell apart before the second world war.
To make sense of all this, it helps to see the political world as one in which technology is beginning to look ever more like geography. The geopolitical way of looking at the world, which was born in the 19th century and revolutionised strategic thinking in the 20th, was based on the idea that the geographical aspects of the physical world could be crucially important to the relations between states. Mountains that blocked transit and plains that permitted it; oilfields and coalfields; pinch-points where maritime traffic could be constrained. Where a states territory stood in respect to such geographical facts of life told it what it should fear and what it might aspire to, whose interests conflicted with its own and whose might align with them. In other words, geography was destiny.
The units of analysis for todays nascent technopolitics are platforms: the technologies on which other technologies are builtand alongside them, increasingly, businesses, governments and ways of life. The platform of all platforms is the internet. Some of the things which stand upon it are huge and widely known, such as Facebook, others small and obscure, such as Kubernetes, a sort of software used in cloud computing. Like geographical territories, these platforms have their own politics. They have their own populations, mostly users, coders and other firms. They have their own laws, which lay out who can change code and access data. They have a position with respect to other platforms which underpin, compete with or build on them, just as territories have defined relationships with their neighbours.
And they have their own governance systems. Some are open. The most famous is Linux, an operating system created and maintained through co-operative efforts to which all are, in principle, free to contribute and from which all are welcome to benefit. Others are closed, as is the convention among many corporate-software makers, such as Oracle. Some are run like absolute monarchies, such as Apple under Steve Jobs, who was the final arbiter over the smallest details in his tech empire.
Their dominant positions in this world of platforms give companies like Facebook and Google powers approaching or surpassing those of many countries. Yet countries canas their economies become more digitisedbe increasingly understood as platforms, too: national operating systems of sorts. Natural resources still count, but digital resources are gaining ever more relevance: skilled and well-trained tech workers, access to scads of data, computing power, internet bandwidth, industrial policy and venture capital. And as with technology platforms, a countrys competitiveness will, to a large extent, depend on how it manages and multiplies these resources.
America is a platform like Microsofts Windows and Android, Googles mobile operating system. These mix aspects of open and closed systems, allowing others to develop applications for their platform, but also closely control it. America combines monopolies and a strongish state with lots of competition. Mainly thanks to this profitable amalgam, the country has given rise to most of the worlds leading tech firms. China is more like Apple and Oracle, which combine being closed with lots of internal competition. The European Union is best compared to an open-source project such as Linux, which needs complex rules to work. India, Japan, Britain, Taiwan and South Korea all run differently and have technology bases to match.
The rise of cloud computing and AIthe first a truly global infrastructure, the second its most important applicationhas heightened the tensions between these platforms. More and more value is created by using oodles of computing power to extract AI models from digital information generated by people, machines and sensors. The models can then be turned into all sorts of services. Transport, health care, teaching, campaigning, warfarethese parts of society will not become data-driven as fast as many predict, but in time they will all be transformed. Whoever controls the digital flows involved can divert much of the rent they generate. Knowledge is power in the virtual world even more than in the real oneand it generates profit. Ian Hogarth, a British tech thinker, summarised the sudden sense of urgency when he wrote in a paper in 2018 that AI policy will become the single most important area of government policy.
Many rich countries have drawn up ambitious industrial-policy plans for AI. Some have also instituted national data strategies which limit the data that can leave the country. A few have begun attacking other countries platforms by hacking their computer systems and spreading misinformation. In short, they are behaving increasingly like the companies producing the technology reshaping their world. Everybody has become much more techno-nationalist, says Justin Sherman of the Atlantic Council, a think-tank.
That the 21st-century internet would be a splinternet was, perhaps, inevitable. It is not just that nations act in their own interests; they also have different preferences and values, for instance regarding privacy. High digital borders behind which data get stuck, however, are not in the interests of most countriesthough they may be in the interest of some governments. Russia wants to create a sovereign internet that can be cut from the rest of the online world at the flip of a switch (while retaining the capability to mess around in more open systems). Countries interested in using flows of data to improve their citizens lot, though, will see few advantages. In a splinternet world choice will be limited, costs will rise and innovation will slow. And all the while China, with the biggest silo and thus the greatest access to data, loses least.
It is against this background that a grand bargain needs to be struck. Its broad outline would be for America to get security guarantees and rule-making bodies in which its interests can be taken seriously. In return it would recognise European privacy and other regulatory concerns as well as demands that tech titans be properly taxed. Ideally, such a deal would also include India and other developing countries, which want to make sure that they do not risk becoming mere sources of raw data, while having to pay for the digital intelligence produced.
In terms of security, the parties to the bargain would ensure each other secure, diverse supply chains for digital infrastructure. To get there, the CNAS proposes, in effect, to partially mutualise them: among other things, members of a tech alliance should co-ordinate their efforts to restructure supply chains and might set up a semiconductor consortium with facilities around the world. Supporting open technologies and standards that create a diverse set of suppliers would help, too. An example is OpenRAN, a mobile network that allows carriers to mix and match components rather than having to buy from one vendor. A world with open infrastructure like this need not, in principle, just depend on a few suppliers, as is the case today with Huawei, Nokia or Ericsson.
To give in to Europe on other fronts in return for help in such matters would be costly to America, which has largely opposed attempts to regulate and tax its tech giants abroad. In terms of statecraft, that is an attractive part of the arrangement; to be willing to pay a cost shows that you place real value on what you are getting.
If an alliance of democracies is to deliver a China-proof technosphere, America will have to accept that the interdependence of the tech world on which the whole idea is based means that it cannot act unconstrained. Henry Farrell of Johns Hopkins University argues that America has so far simply weaponised this interdependence, using chokepoints where it has leverage to strangle enemies and put pressure on friends. But Europes resistance to banning Huaweis gear and the ECJs decision show that even friends can balk. America needs to give if it is to receive.
It might not have to give all that much. European views on regulating platforms more strictly because of their tendency to become quasi-natural monopolies are not exactly mainstream in Washington, DC, but nor are they completely alien to the political debate there. A recent congressional report about how to limit big techs power included many ideas already touted in Brussels, such as banning tech giants from favouring their own services and refusing to connect to competing ones. Positions on regulating speech online are not that far apart either. As in Europe, there is growing agreement in America that legislation is needed to push social-media firms to do more to rid their services of hate speech and the like.
A deal on taxing tech firms seems within reach, too. The Trump administration resisted efforts to compel them to pay taxes where they do business rather than in tax havens, regarding this as a grab for the profits of American companies. A Biden administration is likely to be more open to the argument that more of the taxes on digital firms should go to places where their customers live. Expect negotiations on the matter at the OECD to be revivedas they must be to keep countries from charging digital taxes unilaterally. Barring a compromise, France, Spain and Britain will start collecting such a levy early next year.
In parts of the worlds international bureaucracy the grand bargaining has already begun. When Japan presided over the G20, a club of developing and rich countries, last year, it succeeded in getting the group to launch the Osaka Track, an attempt to come up with rules to regulate global data flows. This summer also saw the launch of the Global Partnership in AI, which is meant to come up with rules for the responsible use of AI, and of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, which brings together lawmakers from 18 countries. These new groups join a few established ones, such as the OECD and the Internet Governance Forum, which have long pushed for common rules in the digital realm. NATO has started to do the same for AI and data-sharing among its members.
One of the key parameters in the bargaining will be how formal a framework the parties want. In some ways, formal is better: everyone knows where they stand. In others, formal is worse: agreement is harder. Take the example of trade, thoroughly formalised within the WTO. Trade agreements take years to negotiate, often only to be blocked by legislatures at the last minute. This is why a Biden administration will probably aim for a much looser form of co-operation, at least initially. An idea discussed in foreign-policy circles close to Mr Biden is that, instead of agreeing on certain policies that then have to be implemented nationally, governments should opt for a division of labour within certain red lines. If Europe wants to go ahead with rules to regulate big tech which do not amount to expropriation, America would not put up a fightthus allowing the EU regulation to become the global standard of sorts, rather as it has done with the GDPR.
Compromises that provide something for everyone are not hard to spot. But reaching them will not be easy. After four years of President Trump, the mistrust on the European side runs deep, says Samm Sacks of CNAS. On the other side of the Atlantic, Congress will not want to make life more difficult for its intelligence agencies, for whom social media and online services have become a crucial source of information. In order for a grand bargain to be reached, all of that must be made more difficult. If the ECJ struck down the Privacy Shield, it was mostly because the court believed that America does not provide enough safeguards to protect European data from the eyes of its intelligence and law-enforcement agencies.
Another big barrier on the way to a bargain will be the question of how much Americas tech titans need to be reined in. To bring globe-spanning technology firms to heel, we need something new: a global alliance that puts democracy first, argues Marietje Schaake, a former member of the European Parliament who now works for the Cyber Policy Centre at Stanford University, in a recent article. Many in California and elsewhere in America like the sound of this, but Congress will only go so far in restricting its tech giants and their business model, which is increasingly based on extracting value from data.
Even if a grand bargain can be reached, many small ones will need to be done as well. That is why, in the long run, the world needs more than bilateral deals and a loose form of co-operation, but something more robust and specialised. It may even have to be something like a World Data Organisation, as Ian Bremmer of the Eurasia Group has suggested (or at least a GADD, a General Agreement on Data and Digital Infrastructure, a bit like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, as the WTOs predecessor was called). Given the sorry state of the WTO, this may seem fanciful, but without such an organisation todays global data flows may shrink to a tricklemuch as protectionism limited trade in the days before the GATT and the WTO.
Will it ever happen? Yes, if history is any guide. In July 1944 representatives of 44 countries met in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, to hash out a new financial order, including the IMF and the World Bank. Granted, the pandemic is no world war. But, with luck, living through it may provide enough motivation to try again in the digital realm.
Correction (November 20th 2020): The market capitalisation figures for Salesforce and MercadoLibre on chart 1 were incorrectly stated as $212.3bn and $87.1bn respectively. These have now been corrected to $233.1bn and $64.7bn. Sorry.
This article appeared in the Briefing section of the print edition under the headline "The new grand bargain"
- Quantum computing research helps IBM win top spot in patent race - CNET - January 14th, 2021
- Error Protected Quantum Bits Entangled: A Milestone in the Development of Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computers - SciTechDaily - January 14th, 2021
- You can find a $180K solar-powered car, qubit controls, and breathing tips at the NL Tech Pavilion at CES 2021 - TechRepublic - January 14th, 2021
- NSA Cites DoD Crypto Work in First-Ever Cybersecurity Year-End Report - MeriTalk - January 14th, 2021
- 'Magic' angle graphene and the creation of unexpected topological quantum states - Princeton University - December 15th, 2020
- Bringing Your Mainframe Into the Cloud Age - CMSWire - December 15th, 2020
- ASC20-21 Student Supercomputer Challenge Kickoff: Quantum Computing Simulations, AI Language Exam and Pulsar Searching with FAST - Business Wire - November 26th, 2020
- Virtual ICM Seminar with Hiroaki Kitano, 'Nobel Turing Challenge-Creating the Engine of Scientific Discovery' to Be Held Nov 26 - HPCwire - November 26th, 2020
- The Trillion-Transistor Chip That Just Left a Supercomputer in the Dust - Singularity Hub - November 26th, 2020
- Imperfections Lower the Simulation Cost of Quantum Computers - Physics - November 24th, 2020
- Is the blockchain vulnerable to hacking by quantum computers? - Moneyweb.co.za - November 24th, 2020
- Can a Computer Devise a Theory of Everything? - The New York Times - November 24th, 2020
- Cracking the Secrets of an Emerging Branch of Physics: Exotic Properties to Power Real-World Applications - SciTechDaily - November 24th, 2020
- Inside the Competition That Will Save Bitcoin From Quantum Computers - Decrypt - November 22nd, 2020
- Foreign policy expert: China is 'outstripping us' in technologies of the future - Brainerd Dispatch - November 22nd, 2020
- Cracking the secrets of an emerging branch of physics - MIT News - November 22nd, 2020
- #SpaceWatchGL Opinion: Quantum Technology and Impact of the Global Space Security - SpaceWatch.Global - November 22nd, 2020
- A Scoville Heat Scale For Measuring The Progress Of Emerging Technologies In 2021 - Forbes - November 22nd, 2020
- Honeywell fires up the H1, its second-generation quantum computer - CNET - November 2nd, 2020
- Quantum computers could soon reveal all of our secrets. The race is on to stop that happening - ZDNet - November 2nd, 2020
- Quantum Computing Expert Warns Governments May Be First to Crack Algorithms Keeping Bitcoin and the Internet Secure - The Daily Hodl - November 2nd, 2020
- Australia's Archer and its plan for quantum world domination - ZDNet - November 2nd, 2020
- Quantum Computing Is Bigger Than Donald Trump - WIRED - November 2nd, 2020
- Will Quantum Mechanics Produce the True Thinking Computer? - Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence - November 2nd, 2020
- Strategic Partnership will aid smooth work in the event of regional crisis: Australia High Commissioner - The Hindu - November 2nd, 2020
- Valuation of quantum computer maker D-Wave slashed by more than half after company struggles to raise financing - The Globe and Mail - October 27th, 2020
- 60-year-old limit to lasers overturned by quantum researchers - Griffith News - October 27th, 2020
- A Measured Approach to Regulating Fast-Changing Tech - Harvard Business Review - October 27th, 2020
- The Importance of Funding Quantum Physics, Even in a Pandemic - Inside Philanthropy - October 23rd, 2020
- Material found in paint may hold the key to a technological revolution - Advanced Science News - October 23rd, 2020
- What is Quantum Computing, and How does it Help Us? - Analytics Insight - October 13th, 2020
- QCE20: Here's what you can expect from Intel's new quantum computing research this week - Neowin - October 13th, 2020
- Canadian quantum computing firms partner to spread the technology - IT World Canada - October 13th, 2020
- Ten-year Forecasts for Quantum Networking Opportunities and Deployments Over the Coming Decade - WFMZ Allentown - October 13th, 2020
- Berkeley Lab Technologies Honored With 7 R&D 100 Awards - Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory - October 5th, 2020
- IBM Partners With HBCUs to Diversify Quantum Computing Workforce - Diverse: Issues in Higher Education - September 25th, 2020
- IBM, Alphabet and well-funded startups in the race for quantum supremacy - IT Brief Australia - September 25th, 2020
- How This Bangalore Based Startup Is Driving Innovation With Quantum Technology-Based Products - Analytics India Magazine - September 25th, 2020
- New faculty add to Yale's strength in applied mathematics - Yale News - September 25th, 2020
- NU receives $115 million federal grant to research and develop beyond state-of-the-art quantum computer - Daily Northwestern - September 24th, 2020
- IBM Just Committed to Having a Functioning 1,000 Qubit Quantum Computer by 2023 - ScienceAlert - September 24th, 2020
- IBM plans to build a 1121 qubit system. What does this technology mean? - The Hindu - September 24th, 2020
- Extending the life of the qubit | Temple Now - Temple University News - September 24th, 2020
- OSTP, NSF, DoE, and IBM make major push to strengthen research in AI and quantum - BlackEngineer.com - September 24th, 2020
- Heres why quantum computing is a cat among the pigeons - BusinessLine - September 12th, 2020
- The Hyperion-insideHPC Interviews: ORNL Distinguished Scientist Travis Humble on Coupling Classical and Quantum Computing - insideHPC - September 12th, 2020
- Oxford Instruments Partners With The 10 Million Consortium, To Launch The First Commercial Quantum Computer In UK - AZoNano - September 10th, 2020
- Combinations of new technologies will upend finance - The Australian Financial Review - September 10th, 2020
- Quantum Computing Market Analysis by Growth, segmentation, performance, Competitive Strategies and Forecast to 2026 - Galus Australis - September 10th, 2020
- The Quantum Dream: Are We There Yet? - Toolbox - September 7th, 2020
- 17 extremely useful productivity tips from this years 40 Under 40 - Yahoo Finance UK - September 7th, 2020
- How Amazon Quietly Powers The Internet - Forbes - September 7th, 2020
- Study Expands Types of Physics, Engineering Problems That Can Be Solved by Quantum Computers - HPCwire - September 4th, 2020
- New evidence that the quantum world is even stranger than we thought - Purdue News Service - September 4th, 2020
- How Andersen Cheng plans to defend against the quantum computer - The Independent - September 4th, 2020
- Quantum computer to be hosted in Abingdon - ClickLancashire - September 4th, 2020
- Assistant director of NSFs Computer and Information Science and Engineering to give virtual talk Sept. 11 - Vanderbilt University News - September 4th, 2020
- Fermilab to lead $115 million National Quantum Information Science Research Center to build revolutionary quantum computer with Rigetti Computing,... - August 29th, 2020
- I confess, I'm scared of the next generation of supercomputers - TechRadar - August 29th, 2020
- Q-NEXT collaboration awarded National Quantum Initiative funding - University of Wisconsin-Madison - August 29th, 2020
- UArizona Scientists to Build What Einstein Wrote off as Science Fiction - UANews - August 29th, 2020
- Quantum leap? US plans for unhackable internet may not fructify within a decade, but India is far behind - The Financial Express - August 4th, 2020
- Google distinguished scientist Hartmut Neven is one of Fast Company's - Fast Company - August 4th, 2020
- Quantum physicists say time travelers don't have to worry about the butterfly effect - The Next Web - August 2nd, 2020
- Week in review: BootHole, RCEs in industrial VPNs, the cybersecurity profession crisis - Help Net Security - August 2nd, 2020
- New UC-led institute awarded $25M to explore potential of quantum computing and train a future workforce - University of California - July 31st, 2020
- The future of encryption: Getting ready for the quantum computer attack - TechRepublic - July 31st, 2020
- IBM and University of Tokyo team up for Quantum Innovation Initiative Consortium - SmartPlanet.com - July 31st, 2020
- 'Butterfly effect' is wrong and reality can 'heal itself', quantum scientists find in time travel experiment - The Independent - July 31st, 2020
- Research: the butterfly effect does not exist in the quantum model - FREE NEWS - July 31st, 2020
- Solving problems by working together: Could quantum computing hold the key to Covid-19? - ITProPortal - July 2nd, 2020
- Spain Introduces the World's First Quantum Phase Battery - News - All About Circuits - July 2nd, 2020
- Professor tackles one more mystery about quantum mechanics and times flow - GeekWire - July 2nd, 2020
- This Week's Awesome Tech Stories From Around the Web (Through June 27) - Singularity Hub - June 29th, 2020
- Kudos: Read about faculty, staff and student awards, appointments and achievements - Vanderbilt University News - June 29th, 2020
- This Is the First Universal Language for Quantum Computers - Popular Mechanics - June 21st, 2020
- Universal Quantum raises $4.5 million to build a large-scale quantum computer - VentureBeat - June 17th, 2020
- Ethereum (ETH) Might Not have Quantum Resistance on its Roadmap, the QRL Team Reveals - Crowdfund Insider - June 17th, 2020
- Craig Knoblock Named Michael Keston Executive Director of the USC Information Sciences Institute - USC Viterbi School of Engineering - June 17th, 2020
- European quantum computing startup takes its funding to 32M with fresh raise - TechCrunch - June 11th, 2020