P.S. I was involved in semiconductor physics and quantum computing way before it became a buzz word.
P.S. I was involved in semiconductor physics and quantum computing way before it became a buzz word.
With Phoenix IBM has a system with over 100 qubits close to 99.9 2Q Fidelity and though that does not sound like much it’s already enough to run operations that can’t be computed classically. The system is so well built that most of these qubits can perform well without crosstalk errors hindering execution, and with phoenix they solved mid circuit reset which didn’t work well before, blocking experiments for meaningful runtime error correction.
There’s an open scoreboard ibm runs open to all to submit problems demonstrating algorithmic breakthroughs https://quantum-advantage-tracker.github.io/
There are contexts in which that's an unacceptable level of risk.
They can harvest all they want, but if no one ever invents a usable, practical and scalable quantum processor all this will be moot.
Therefore it seems weird to use QC as a benchmark. Rather, if your communications being decrypted in the future is unacceptable, then the logical conclusion is that you must not transmit it in such a way that a third party can intercept it.
Admittedly, it is inconvenient or even impractical, so people do accept the risk anyway without admitting it. They are sweeping the issue under the carpet of supposedly QC-proof crypto - because new quantum algorithms can be discovered too.
Amping everyone up with fears over quantum breaking classical seems like a fantastic way to get another round of vulnerabilities injected into everyone's infrastructure.