This article is kind of crap. I kind of expected better from ft.
-----
The reality is that none of these companies — or any other quantum computing firm, for that matter — are actually earning any real money.
-----
ORLY? I guess I should go masssively short IBM shares then. https://newsroom.ibm.com/image/2022%20IBM%20Quantum%20Roadma...
----
Shor’s algorithm has been a godsend to the quantum industry, leading to untold amounts of funding from government security agencies all over the world. However, the commonly forgotten caveat here is that there are many alternative cryptographic schemes that are not vulnerable to quantum computers. It would be far from impossible to simply replace these vulnerable schemes with so-called “quantum-secure” ones.
----
ORLY?
New cryptography can take 20 years or more to be fully deployed to all National Security Systems. NSS equipment is often used for decades after deployment. National security information intelligence value varies depending on classification, sensitivity, and subject, but it can require protection for many decades. -NSA
The solutions we do have do not work very well. Only the weakest FALCON-512 (bad name as it was only 64 bits of quantum security, now the dual lattice attack seems to reduce this to 20?), actually fits the TLS use case without breaking the internet. The signatures are just too big. Cloudflare has testing that proves this.
If that wasn't enough, this person is completely unaware of the annual survey of quantum researches that actually puts the arrivial of a cryptanalyically relevant quantum computer at 2030 or so. Peter Shor is actually one of the people polled in the survey, this person is not. And if you parts are still clean, you can look at the surveys estimates since 2018. These estimates are clearly trending towards sooner and sooner, instead of further and futher away.
It used to be that the government would explicitly solicit for somebody to build them a particle disintegrator. If that was your business, you could then apply for a grant based on that solicitation. Recently, they have added something called “open topic”, which is basically for anything that the government would find useful but isn’t smart enough to ask for, from ray guns to open source cybersecurity projects. I think if it’s related to either blowing things up, or preventing things from getting blown up, uncle sam wants to talk to you!
I'm not exactly in the space you are talking about, but in the USA, we have two broad categories for this stuff, ITAR and EAR. ITAR is the set of regulations that covers technology that only have one use, government (think missiles/night vision goggles/combat body armor). The EAR covers everything that can be used by both the government and consumers/enterprise (think quantum computing, AI, green tech, and cybersecurity), aka dual-use technology.
The difference between a defense start-up and nerds blowing up stuff in the desert is the relationship with the federal government allowing the nerds to blow stuff up. A big pitfall is not knowing you need the governments permission to blow stuff up beyond a certain size. And if you innovate in the field of blowing stuff up, and inadvertently let north North Korea learn about it, you're probably going to jail. I'm not an attorney so I can't speak to other legal risks, but watch for regulatory violations.
Generally, these types of innovations happen inside of institutions that have the capacity to comply with regulations and develop the idea. But if you invent something valuable in your garage, the path forward is probably via a SBIR/STTR grant through whatever part of the government your invention relates to. As part of that grant, you become would 'known' to the government. Other routes that I am unaware of may also exist.
I think the demand for innovation has always been there, but I think it's ramping up since Biden took office. It seems less a function of any looming potential conflict, and more a function of new funding/initiatives.
If you qualify, the government will give you a SBIR phase I and II grant as a form of non-dilutitive investment, and after that, phase III can go any number of ways. That's when VC usually gets involved.
I don't think there is a limit on the research for particle disintegrators, the limit would be on the commercialization and sale of said particle disintegrators. I'm sure the ITAR regulations have the answer somewhere in there, but check with an actual attorney before researching particle disintigration tech.
The dominiant traits, you are a US citizen, your company is owned by US citizens, the work is only done on US soil, and you aren't explicitly banned by the government (they have a list). Military experience, and federal experience and networks are very helpful, but not required if you've got a great idea.
I hope this helps. I'm still trying to figure this stuff out for myself.
Scala is a fine scotch, but at a very young age. It's version 2.10.3, everything is still changing fairly rapidly. All it needs to be adopted in a more widespread manner is to improve it's approachability. Even for engineers who've been programming for years, Scala is hard to grok. The vast deviations in style don't help.
I'm betting it's going to take over the world in a few years, especially as it expands it foothold in the Big Data space.
I just heard notices will be sent out 'late this evening'. And I'm assuming that's late this evening, PST. Also we got 4 views. 1 was me, 3 had to be from YC.
----- The reality is that none of these companies — or any other quantum computing firm, for that matter — are actually earning any real money. ----- ORLY? I guess I should go masssively short IBM shares then. https://newsroom.ibm.com/image/2022%20IBM%20Quantum%20Roadma...
---- Shor’s algorithm has been a godsend to the quantum industry, leading to untold amounts of funding from government security agencies all over the world. However, the commonly forgotten caveat here is that there are many alternative cryptographic schemes that are not vulnerable to quantum computers. It would be far from impossible to simply replace these vulnerable schemes with so-called “quantum-secure” ones. ---- ORLY? New cryptography can take 20 years or more to be fully deployed to all National Security Systems. NSS equipment is often used for decades after deployment. National security information intelligence value varies depending on classification, sensitivity, and subject, but it can require protection for many decades. -NSA
The solutions we do have do not work very well. Only the weakest FALCON-512 (bad name as it was only 64 bits of quantum security, now the dual lattice attack seems to reduce this to 20?), actually fits the TLS use case without breaking the internet. The signatures are just too big. Cloudflare has testing that proves this.
If that wasn't enough, this person is completely unaware of the annual survey of quantum researches that actually puts the arrivial of a cryptanalyically relevant quantum computer at 2030 or so. Peter Shor is actually one of the people polled in the survey, this person is not. And if you parts are still clean, you can look at the surveys estimates since 2018. These estimates are clearly trending towards sooner and sooner, instead of further and futher away.
If you still have doubts, read this: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...