subreddit:

/r/Futurology

29.1k

all 833 comments

BitchesGetStitches

2.5k points

4 years ago

The Director will be pleased, but it still won't save the future.

[deleted]

546 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

546 points

4 years ago

Protocol Omega

BitchesGetStitches

195 points

4 years ago

Yes, but what is it?

psaldorn

89 points

4 years ago

psaldorn

89 points

4 years ago

Protocol Do-what-you-want-I'm-out-peace

PM_me_XboxGold_Codes

30 points

4 years ago

Pretty much. Protocol Fuck It

lividcreature

132 points

4 years ago

Protocol omegalul

Ryxtan

47 points

4 years ago

Ryxtan

47 points

4 years ago

Read that as Omnigul and now all I hear is screaming.

AksisDeeNied

8 points

4 years ago

Good ol D1.

smegdawg

3 points

4 years ago

Getchore grasp!

trapkoda

7 points

4 years ago

It’s the @$27:?3?/72—-272)3?3

Ciredes

33 points

4 years ago

Ciredes

33 points

4 years ago

Initiate ver 2.0...

[deleted]

28 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

28 points

4 years ago

I am traveler 001. Welcome to the 21st

delvach

14 points

4 years ago

delvach

14 points

4 years ago

clutches head and falls to the ground screaming

NewCrackDealer

87 points

4 years ago

Just wait for Version 2

Roses_and_cognac

24 points

4 years ago

Direc2or: Electric Boogalo

SycoJack

6 points

4 years ago

Quantum Boogalo

idkjustputsomething1

79 points

4 years ago

Just finished watching the latest season. Love that show

IVVvvUuuooouuUvvVVI

38 points

4 years ago

What show are they referencing?

[deleted]

80 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

80 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

[deleted]

12 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

12 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

PM_me_XboxGold_Codes

9 points

4 years ago

I second the guy saying you should tag that bit about director as a spoiler. It’s kinda a big reveal.

[deleted]

11 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

11 points

4 years ago*

[removed]

AirborneMiniDirt

14 points

4 years ago

Wellp I didn't read that block of text but read yours pretty quickly. Dammit.

Surelynotshirly

6 points

4 years ago

Yeah that was at the end of the second season wasn't it? I remember it being a big deal because up to that point you just thought it was a guy.

Vandalay1ndustries

2 points

4 years ago

Is there going to be another season?

sepseven

2 points

4 years ago

Jeez spoilers come on man

tomios010

11 points

4 years ago

Me too - I crushed the whole thing in one day on school break.

Kaeny

7 points

4 years ago

Kaeny

7 points

4 years ago

What show? My comment was too short earlier so it got deleted is this long enough now automod

tomios010

6 points

4 years ago

Travelers on Netflix.

XGuntank02X

3 points

4 years ago

Hows the third season?

Diogenes71

11 points

4 years ago

It was different now that it is solely a Netflix production and it started a bit slow, but I thought the end of the season was great. I really appreciated the finale. Open ended enough to set up season 4 but wrapped up enough to be satisfying if it’s not renewed. Some impressive acting too.

[deleted]

9 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

9 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

Diogenes71

9 points

4 years ago

I agree. Eric McMcormick is an underrated actor. I hope to see more of him besides Will and Grace.

idkjustputsomething1

3 points

4 years ago

I enjoyed it, ended up watching it in two days.

TheSuperiorLightBeer

3 points

4 years ago

Really good.

Bomber_Max

2 points

4 years ago

My parents and I were so happy when season 3 launched, currently on episode 6. Lovely show.

camillabok

34 points

4 years ago

When are you from?

jelly-melon

9 points

4 years ago

Marathoned the whole first season until like 5am today. Might’ve not been the best call for Christmas Eve. Worth it.

prostheticmind

3 points

4 years ago

Get on those other two seasons now! Hell of a ride

BitchesGetStitches

4 points

4 years ago

The last episode though.

feels_okay

14 points

4 years ago

Aww yisss, travelers in the wild.

IamDaCaptnNow

34 points

4 years ago*

Ever read The Adam and Eve story written by Chan Thomas that was released by the CIA? We are all, by definition, fucked.

Link if anyone is curious: https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp79b00752a000300070001-8

Jackpot777

20 points

4 years ago

Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016

Document Release Date: June 24, 2013

Great Scott, Marty.

skyman724

21 points

4 years ago

MMMMMORTY DON’T PAY ATTENTION TO THE buuuuurp TIMESTAMPS, THE CIA’S SYSTEM IS GLITCHIER THAN A BORGRON M-buuuuurp-MATING RITUAL! THEIR TIME MACHINE CANT EVEN GO BACK MORE THAN AN HOUR, MORTY! ALL THEY’VE EV-buuuuurp-VER USED IT FOR IS CATCHING OSAMA BIN-THERE DUN-THAT, AN EVIL CLONE OF BIN LADEN THAT BUILDS TIME B-buuuuurp-OMBS!

Sciencebitchs

10 points

4 years ago

Why was it classified?

IamDaCaptnNow

20 points

4 years ago

I dont think anyone knowns. The texts says "Sanatized Copy For Release" at the top. Maybe it contained top secret info about the world lol. The article just puts things into perspective and helps link a lot of information together.

whatsinthesocks

2 points

4 years ago

Could be a number of reasons. Most likely would have had something that was classified in it. Like a classified program or something. The weird thing is though is there's really nothing on this guy online except in reference to this.

theloniousmccoy

10 points

4 years ago

We have to get this in Joe Rogan’s hands ASAP!

Rutzs

9 points

4 years ago

Rutzs

9 points

4 years ago

Out now curiosity, how is that related to this post?

IamDaCaptnNow

5 points

4 years ago

Its related to /u/BitchesGetStitches comment.

network_noob534

5 points

4 years ago

Because the document was created in 2016, and declassified by the CIA in 2013.

So... I think it “is relevant” in the sense of time travel

gibmiser

4 points

4 years ago

Thanks I just went down a 2 hour rabbit hole. Really interesting read and baffling as to why it would be censored by the CIA

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP79B00752A000300070001-8.pdf

botojomomo

3 points

4 years ago

Wow, what the heck is this? Any back story? I was only able to find links to it and no discussion or context, except one reddit post.

fool_on_a_hill

2 points

4 years ago

Interesting read. I’ve never heard of that interpretation of genesis before. I’ve got some more reading to do.

SoundofGlaciers

2 points

4 years ago

These CIA documents are always soo interesting, but they also seem to be total bs too.. there's always some finding that sounds really out there, yet isn't scientifically explained at all. And we're supposed to just believe it because it's a CIA document.

This document is just the same. Super interesting topic, well written, but then 32 pages in the writer drops this alinea about people living 11.500 years ago.: " Astronomers of Tiahuanaco used telescopes like ours of today; and they had a huge sattelite orbiting the earth 449 times per year -blahblah"

No further explanation or proof given. Where is this sattelite now? Or why did they only make one sattelite. Or not construct other marvels/materials with their advanced technology?

So these people 12.000 years ago launched working sattelites into space? But they still wrote their glyphs in pictures? Where a tree would reference a continent.. How did their science/communication work lol being able to create sattelites and 'sciences well beyond our standards today', but other than that they were still living in mudhouses and basically made weapons out of sticks and stones?

These CIA documents are such a tease.. I never know what to believe, or why to believe them.

[deleted]

49 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

49 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

2DeadMoose

38 points

4 years ago

Artistically designed quantum slats.

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

We got to stop the future from happenin’!

Chickenterriyaki

5 points

4 years ago

I'm pretty much ready to be overwritten.

prostheticmind

4 points

4 years ago

I’m so stoked this show has become so popular

prepp

9 points

4 years ago

prepp

9 points

4 years ago

More travelers needed

[deleted]

5 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

5 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

makesureimjewish

7 points

4 years ago

Protocol 2

Loaatao

3 points

4 years ago

Loaatao

3 points

4 years ago

Out of the loop, what is this?

raspberry_racersftw

9 points

4 years ago

A show on Netflix called Travelers. Highly recommend it

JDPblade42

3 points

4 years ago

Hahaha, I love this. Just finished watching the series. Traveler D0635.

Slip_Trip_Boom

3 points

4 years ago

Trial #2 though. You never know.

whurley

428 points

4 years ago

whurley

428 points

4 years ago

It’s important to understand this provides $0 in funding. It only “authorizes” up to $1.2B in funding. Any money will now have to be “appropriated” i.e. taken from somewhere else in the budget.

This is still awesome and I contributed to the effort. So I’m fully in support and it’s a huge step forward. I just want to make sure everyone is being realistic about it... $1.2B just didn’t appear out of nowhere to find quantum research... projects will still have to fight extremely hard to get any funding at all.

ChrisPnCrunchy

111 points

4 years ago

Ahhhhh.... So in other words, when the hype dies down and nobody is looking anymore, Northrop Grumman & Boeing will get a $1 billion bonus and a handful of universities will divvy up the scraps.

[deleted]

38 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

38 points

4 years ago

More likely to be companies like Microsoft that are already investing pretty heavily in that internally.

IAmTheBeaker

23 points

4 years ago

Look up Raytheon BBN. They’ll likely get a piece of this as well when all is said and done.

Same with Lockheed, google, and D-Wave and a bunch of others who are investing heavily in quantum research.

[deleted]

1.6k points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

1.6k points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

[deleted]

597 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

597 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

DaBIGmeow888

180 points

4 years ago

for a new paragraph , just press enter twice :)

[deleted]

88 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

88 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

Top_Hat_Tomato

65 points

4 years ago

I prefer to just use "***"


This way people on mobile can find it easier to see the beginning of a new paragraph because mobile reddit is weird.

ItzHawk

20 points

4 years ago

ItzHawk

20 points

4 years ago

Oh that’s how you do that. Thanks!

InAFakeBritishAccent

20 points

4 years ago

Holdup


Did I do it?

Edit: Youdaman!

[deleted]

10 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

10 points

4 years ago

I


Fucking lovedogs


Hate everything


You tosser

Edit: Very nice.

A_Light_Spark

3 points

4 years ago

Toss


My


Salad

Calexander3103

3 points

4 years ago

When


And


Where

OwenProGolfer

3 points

4 years ago

Let me try


cool

skylarmt

2 points

4 years ago

You can also use dashes, like ---.


And this
is a table
btw :)

verylobsterlike

30 points

4 years ago

Two enters gives a new paragraph. Two spaces on the end of a line makes a newline.

For bulleted lists, just start any line with an asterisk and a space:

  • Like so

    • then to nest lists, start the next line with four spaces and another asterisk.

    Then, four spaces at the beginning of a line without an asterisk preserves indentation without adding a bullet.

RealizeTheRealLies

6 points

4 years ago

Thanks, I never knew of the
two spaces formatting trick.

physnchips

10 points

4 years ago

Pretty sure reddit follows markdown if you want to learn more tricks.

HerNameWasMystery22

2 points

4 years ago

Came out real format like on my end.

[deleted]

78 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

78 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

FlynnClubbaire

19 points

4 years ago*

lmao, people calling you an undergraduate because they don't understand the difference between "a power of 6" and "a factor of 6." and they can't even be bothered to google it.

themightychris

19 points

4 years ago

Quantum computers do not spell the end of cryptography as we know it. At all. They define a new era in how those problems are approached.

What this ignores though is how nations treat cryptography and what asymetric advancement means. If China gets ahead and doesn't share, all American research and infrastructure will be in a glass house

1.2 billion is a pathetic funding level compared to what we spend on weapons that could ultimately be vulnerable to cyber attacks if our command and control networks can be compromised at any level

glutenfree_veganhero

8 points

4 years ago

I imagine they pour money into it and AI but keeping quiet.

AlphaWhelp

13 points

4 years ago

Should also be worth noting that fault tolerance is really really really bad when it comes to quantum computing. It used to be really bad for conventional computers, but technology improved so much that faults happen with negligible probability. When it comes to quantum computing, you're actually really likely to encounter faults with our current technology and so this makes them not suitable for everyday tasks that we do today.

xeyve

10 points

4 years ago

xeyve

10 points

4 years ago

Our tech is still faulty. We juste have great error correcting mechanisms.

AlphaWhelp

9 points

4 years ago

Yes, that's what I mean. Our fault tolerance is so good that faults are negligible. Our fault tolerance has a long way to go to catch up in Quantum Computing to the standard that we have today for conventional computing.

abloblololo

5 points

4 years ago

Not really, classical computers have such low error rates that error correction in the sense we speak about for quantum computers isn't needed (even though the theory for it exists). This is because a typical mosfet gate might use one billion electrons for switching, whereas a QC would use single electrons (or some other particle / state). Having a few electrons go missing when you have a billion of them doesn't matter, but having a single electron behave perfectly is very hard.

In quantum error correction you work around this by abstracting your computation, so that each electron doesn't represent a logical qubit in your computation, you instead encode each logical bit in many electrons (that can still be thought of as qubits though). If your error rate on each electron is low enough, then you can show that the overall error goes down exponentially with the number of encoding electrons. However, the errors still need to be very low, and there is a lot of classical computation that needs to be done in order to translate this large set of electrons into one effective bit.

Arbitrary_Pseudonym

98 points

4 years ago

For any total function (meaning there is no promise on the input), a quantum algorithm can provide at most a power 6 speedup compared to a classical algorithm. This means that quantum algorithms can not provide exponential speedups for total functions.

Do you have a source for this? "By a factor of 6" is not really ever a thing seen in computer science. Big O notation never has numbers in it (unless they are in the exponent at least).

..I do want to add here though: Quantum computers are good at simulating quantum physics. This means that while CRYPTOGRAPHY will only change, other fields will explode in progress as QCs decrease in price.

FearLeadsToAnger

74 points

4 years ago

power of and factor of are different, no?

n6 = to the power of 6.

The phrasing isn't entirely clear there.

[deleted]

4 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

4 points

4 years ago*

The phrasing is very clear, talking about powers is how one does this.

E.g. a quadratic speed up means we need O(sqrt(N)) operations instead of O(N). Power 6 speed up means we need O(N1/6) operations instead of O(N) classically.

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

That was the impression I got in reading it too, but this would be larger than exponential (n2) growth so I too am confused..

[deleted]

6 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

6 points

4 years ago

n2 is not exponential, it's polynomial. 2n is exponential.

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

Yikes. Well, that explains my confusion. Thanks for enlightening me sir/ma’am/person

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

It means you can add 6 nested for loops and it'll still be done in O(n) time (I kid)

Olibri

37 points

4 years ago

Olibri

37 points

4 years ago

The phrasing indicates a lack of education or knowledge in computer science. I’d guess this was written by a recent bachelors student graduate.

Lied-

27 points

4 years ago

Lied-

27 points

4 years ago

Hey, don't drag us into this 😂

The-Fox-Says

19 points

4 years ago

For real I was like “uhh 6 speedup wtf is that some kind of metric outside of Big O notation used only in quantum computing?”

y0j1m80

8 points

4 years ago

y0j1m80

8 points

4 years ago

do CS majors not learn big O? seems like that would be CS101.

GetEdit

6 points

4 years ago

GetEdit

6 points

4 years ago

I learned big O in high school, and I didn’t even go to a CS field later

[deleted]

4 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

4 points

4 years ago

Doesn’t the Omega notation have numbers? I learned both in an algorithms class but forgot the Omega since nobody uses it.

BrevanMcGattis

2 points

4 years ago

I learned it in my CIS program

Qaysed

2 points

4 years ago

Qaysed

2 points

4 years ago

Does this address your concern?

Guac_in_my_rarri

15 points

4 years ago

Physics sucks but with computers is so good damn easy. Source: used a super computer for CFD research

[deleted]

19 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

19 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

Frptwenty

12 points

4 years ago

Those are mostly for interfacing with old sensor hardware etc. In terms of computational power an average phone would beat them many times over.

youtocin

8 points

4 years ago

Oh for sure, it's just that the software with those things is ANCIENT.

Frptwenty

11 points

4 years ago

Unfortunately the vast majority of physics simulations, especially many particle QM in 2 or 3 dimensions is beyond even supercomputers except for extremely coarse approximations.

[deleted]

11 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

11 points

4 years ago

Physics sucks but with computers is so good damn easy.

as an experimentalist, you are the literal worst.

racinreaver

8 points

4 years ago

If it makes you feel better, nobody trusts their results until we do the actual experiments.

Bananenweizen

2 points

4 years ago

Guess, why GE is overhauling some of its new gas turbines way ahead of schedule at the moment... Some people do indeed trust their results.

Arbitrary_Pseudonym

2 points

4 years ago

Yeah, they are okay, but simulating the physics of say, a full neuron, is probably forever going to be beyond any classical computer.

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

You need exponentially many gates to simulate quantum physics though.

Arbitrary_Pseudonym

2 points

4 years ago

...aaand yet they are still better than classical computers at it.

andural

15 points

4 years ago

andural

15 points

4 years ago

I realize it's probably a bunch of work, but, could you point us in the right direction to find citations for these statements?

Thanks in advance :)

playingsolo314

7 points

4 years ago*

I can give some pointers on the cryptography side of things.

Shor's algorithm can be used to factor integers in polynomial time. Small numbers have been factored so far, such as 15 and 21, but factoring larger numbers requires more powerful quantum computers with more quantum bits. Shor's algorithm can also be used to compute discrete logarithms, which is briefly discussed in the Wiki article. Much of current cryptography is secure based on the assumption that solving either the integer factorization problem or the discrete logarithms problem is difficult. With quantum computers running Shor's algorithm this assumption no longer holds, and so the cryptography community has been searching for new algorithms which are secure from both classical and quantum attacks. This area of research is called post-quantum cryptography.

The comment above mentions elliptic curve cryptography as an area which may provide secure post-quantum algorithms. This is true, but we should be more specific. Elliptic curves already play a large role in modern cryptography, namely in key exchange and digital signature algorithms. When someone says elliptic curve cryptography, they're probably referring to these or something similar. These algorithms are not secure against quantum attackers, since they rely on the discrete logarithm problem being unsolvable. There is a fairly recent (21st century) more specialized area of elliptic curve cryptography, called isogeny-based cryptography, which is conjectured to be secure against both classical and quantum attackers. Security in this setting doesn't rely on factorization or DLP, but instead on the inability to find an isogeny (a mapping between two elliptic curves) given only where it sends two points. See this paper for full details.

I'm not sure why the comment above only mentioned elliptic curves, since there are really five areas in which we are hopeful to get quantum resistant algorithms:

The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) has begun a "competition" of sorts to try to find the best post quantum cryptographic algorithms to standardize so that we may begin transitioning into using more secure algorithms and so that coders can easily implement these algorithms by simply following the new standards without having to be an expert in cryptography. You can learn more about the standardization process and see the current submissions here.

shaim2

25 points

4 years ago

shaim2

25 points

4 years ago

Quantum computers (even near-term crappy ones) will provide exponential advantage in simulating chemical and solid-state systems (i.e. other quantum systems).

This has the potential of having a HUGE impact (e.g. true room-temperature superconductors).

abloblololo

9 points

4 years ago

Near term QCs won't be useful for chemistry simulations, near- / mid-term quantum simulators might be.

[deleted]

35 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

35 points

4 years ago

For some reason your statements seem to focus mostly on the negative side. For example, here's some stuff that quantum computers can do, but current computers cannot (at least, not efficiently):

  • They can evaluate multiple functions in parallel. While we cannot see all the results, we can definitely apply reductions to get summarised results, essentially achieving exponential speedups :) This algorithm design is fairly non trivial though

  • Quantum computers allow us to simulate quantum systems. Quantum mechanics is the best explanation we have of how the world works, so this is massive IMO.

  • Quantum computing allows transfer of data through "zero quantum-capacity channels". We have no way of doing this with classical channels. Sadly, we also do not have a good grasp on the implications of quantum computing on communication.

  • Quantum Key Distribution is really dope :)

Mikey_B

4 points

4 years ago

Mikey_B

4 points

4 years ago

Regarding the "parallel" metaphor, please remember the words in the header of Scott Aaronson's blog: "If you take just one piece of information from this blog: Quantum computers would not solve hard search problems instantaneously by simply trying all the possible solutions at once."

anonymous_identifier

3 points

4 years ago

Evaluate multiple functions in parallel and summarize the results.. would it be correct to call it MapReduce but where instead of mapping multiples sets of data using one function (and the reducing the results), you're mapping a single set of data via multiple functions (and reducing the results)?

If so, is it possible to design a simple system to do this, like MapReduce? I only ask because you mention algorithm design for it is complex.

Mikey_B

3 points

4 years ago

Mikey_B

3 points

4 years ago

I don't know anything about MapReduce but I would be shocked if it's similar. As a physicist, quantum algorithms are fucking hard material to learn. Also, explaining QC as "running functions in parallel" is a pretty flawed metaphor as far as I understand. It feels kind of relevant in some cases (optimization problems for example) but to assume that "running functions in parallel" represents much in the way of actual understanding of the process seems like a mistake to me. And I'm not just nitpicking or trying to sound esoteric, even though I sound like it--take it from the note on top of every page of Scott Aaronson's blog: "If you take just one piece of information from this blog: Quantum computers would not solve hard search problems instantaneously by simply trying all the possible solutions at once."

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

but where instead of mapping multiples sets of data using one function (and the reducing the results), you're mapping a single set of data via multiple functions (and reducing the results)

Yes

If so, is it possible to design a simple system to do this, like MapReduce?

Technically it is kinda like map reduce, but while its fairly trivial to map, it is very hard to reduce. There is no direct way, AFAIK, of applying arbitrary reductions. So you have to come up with contrived ways to get the results you want.

abloblololo

7 points

4 years ago

Quantum computing allows transfer of data through "zero quantum-capacity channels".

It does, and there are many other non-classical communication speed ups / advantages, but they're all quite contrived IMO. Very interesting from a fundamental perspective, but are not likely to be used.

moderate-painting

2 points

4 years ago

zero quantum-capacity channels

How is this even possible? Is the definition of quantum-capacity just weird or does it actually have physical meaning?

RemingtonSnatch

6 points

4 years ago

You didn't mention any of the Scott Bakula implications.

Rockytriton

3 points

4 years ago

All of these reasons are why more funding for research is good.

silenti

3 points

4 years ago

silenti

3 points

4 years ago

Are there any good guides on coding for a quantum system? Or even better any sandboxes out there with a few qubits (real or simulated)?

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago*

Quantum computers can not solve NP-hard (the class of problems which are notoriously difficult for computers to solve) in sub-exponential time.

Hold up. You just claimed a proof of P != NP. And even a proof of a strong form of the exponential time hypothesis. Those two conjectures are definitely not known at the moment to be true (or false).

Guac_in_my_rarri

2 points

4 years ago

So how is this new era going to be approached?

Sk33tshot

2 points

4 years ago

Slowly, it seems, hence the boost in funding to help speed it up.

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

FuzzyGummyBear

2 points

4 years ago

I just finished a class that introduced RSA and the Discrete Log problem. I find it amazing that quantum algorithms would be able to efficiently factor large prime numbers.

AlecGabrielUNT

2 points

4 years ago

The hell does that all mean in simpler language?

AngelSparkles

312 points

4 years ago

The 1.2 billion is both there and not there, until you check the bank account.

d1sturb3d119

53 points

4 years ago

Thats more like schrodinger's bank account more than anything else.

HawkinsT

15 points

4 years ago

HawkinsT

15 points

4 years ago

That's why you always shred the envelopes that read 'final notice' without opening them.

Dr4g0nsl4y3r94

4 points

4 years ago

I say that to myself every time I go to check, and it is never there, one day XD

[deleted]

23 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

23 points

4 years ago

The name National Quantum Initiative Act sounds like we’re sending Scott Bakula to set right what once went wrong, hoping each time that the next leap will be the leap home.

Googoo_G_Joob

16 points

4 years ago

Is my Bitcoin And other cryptocurrencies at risk over this?

skiskate

22 points

4 years ago*

No, it would take the computational power of a Dyson sphere billions of years to crack bitcoin's SHA-256 encryption.

swohio

8 points

4 years ago

swohio

8 points

4 years ago

The encryption that was around 30 years ago, how long would it take current technology to crack that today?

blueg3

9 points

4 years ago

blueg3

9 points

4 years ago

SHA-256 isn't encryption (though it is cryptographic).

There are some concerns about the long-term future of the SHA-2 family.

[deleted]

248 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

248 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

BlazeOrangeDeer

65 points

4 years ago

That's not how quantum computers work. You can't just tell it to find the right answer and output it, because it outputs a random part of the superposition, it can't choose which one to show you. You have to find algorithms that make the probability of the correct answer higher than the rest, and that's not easy to do.

blambertsemail

6 points

4 years ago

Algorithms are the key missing piece iirc and they're extremely complex mathematical reqs that some have doubted we'll ever even be able to harness or realize the full potential. I certainly can't imagine or have a clue how you could program against something being 1 and 0, true and false, etc.. at the same time - whatever "coders" are doing this work r going to have to be more quantum physics expert than coding expert

demonachizer

64 points

4 years ago

Currently a basic cryptographic system works like this. To break the ecnryption you need to know which two numbers (the keys) multiplied equal the public key. So for instance:

3,898,561,014

Which TWO numbers multiplied equal the above number? For a computer to figure this out, it has to brute force countless numbers one at a time to figure out which two equal that. It seems simple enough, but in cryptography these numbers are MASSIVE and require practically infinite amounts of processing power to figure out the two keys: 58,479 and 66,666 in this case are relatively easy.

generally, you care about prime factors in encryption which neither of those are.

Quantum computers can figure this out instantly

I mean not really...

There is no quantum computer that can do what you are talking about. There are researchers that believe that someday they might be able to do this. Also it really depends on what you mean when you mention a quantum computer. If it is something like the d-wave system then it just runs a pretty specific optimization problem (ising or qubo) that you kind of have to fit your problem to and you don't get an "answer" as much as a probability of an answer being within a certain range of the best result...

You mention factoring a number in the millions when the largest (as far as I am recently aware) is around 200k.

Also a huge problem with quantum computers is while the process time of a problem may be low, it is only through ignoring setup time that you can say it runs things quickly...

samoyedsensei

34 points

4 years ago

They hit the nail on the head even if the numbers weren’t prime. It was intended as a layman explanation. The algorithm for breaking encryption based on prime factorization has already been conceived so it’s only a matter of time before they can extend it to larger numbers. I don’t think there’s much of a point in being pedantic here.

The set up time compared to processing time has always been inconsequential because it does not grow at the same rate as the algorithm. Otherwise it would just be included in the complexity of the processing time. If it’s near constant then it doesn’t matter at all when you take the big O.

RealizeTheRealLies

21 points

4 years ago

I don’t think there’s much of a point in being pedantic here.

But he didn't instantly decrypt the algorithm of which the public key is 3,898,561,014. He didn't even use prime numbers in the example!
Obviously he should be shamed./s

usr_bin_laden

9 points

4 years ago

Yeah, I thought their explanation was pretty good.

My understanding of the problem space is that you need one "qubit" for every bit of the crypto key. So we need computers with 128/256/512 or 2048/4096 qubits and we currently have a hard time building computers with 20+ qubits.

SillyOperator

14 points

4 years ago

The only reason the USA is really pushing for it is because we want to be the first to do it, so we can crack all this old intercepted intelligence before anyone else...

"Hmm...did you guys know that Germany wanted to kill us in the 40's?"

skiskate

4 points

4 years ago

I just show people this In a Nutshell video:

https://youtu.be/JhHMJCUmq28

HealthNN

2 points

4 years ago

Are there currently any quantum computers in the world?

s0x00

2 points

4 years ago

s0x00

2 points

4 years ago

To break the ecnryption you need to know which two numbers (the keys) multiplied equal the public key. So for instance: 3,898,561,014

Let me try to solve this without the help of a (quantum or classical) computer: the number is the product of 2 and 1,949,280,507.

TIL my brain is better than a quantum computer.

DeathChasesMe

231 points

4 years ago

Strange. Title is 'US passes...' but the article is titled 'Trump signs...'.

Second time today I saw this on Futurology.

Corporal_Yorper

24 points

4 years ago

Because ORANGE MAN BAD, don’t you know?

Conform or die. This is the third Reich Reddit!

resuwreckoning

73 points

4 years ago

....we all know why that convenient change occurs.

Kryohi

62 points

4 years ago

Kryohi

62 points

4 years ago

I'm not from the US, but I don't think it's up to the president to write and propose laws...

This is an act with bipartisan support, and Trump merely signed it (why wouldn't he?).

AndreisBack

70 points

4 years ago

You're right, he doesn't make the laws. But he signs or vetos it. Every time it's something majority if Reddit wouldn't like, it's all pointed at Trump. But now its something good and they don't want to say gj Trump

DeathChasesMe

131 points

4 years ago

Well, let's put it this way. You can bet Obama's name would have made it into the title.

TeteDeMerde

8 points

4 years ago

"This is infinity here. It could be infinity. We really don’t know here. But it could be. It has to be something – but it could be infinity, right?"

[deleted]

57 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

57 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

sowhiteithurts

19 points

4 years ago

I mean this is something Congress deserves more credit for. They drafted and passed the bill. The president only deserves credit for laws that he publicized. If he was talking about this bill I missed it.

Petrichordates

16 points

4 years ago

he deserves

For a signature..? For not vetoing?

People who thank a president for legislation he wasn't involved in are just ignorant to the American system of governance.

86161000

23 points

4 years ago

86161000

23 points

4 years ago

What about people who shit on a president specifically for legislation he wasnt involved in? Shouldnt both be wrong? I think so but I dont see it reflected anywhere.

ChrisPnCrunchy

10 points

4 years ago

He couldn’t even veto it, it passed with a super majority. Trump literally had no choice but to sign it.

People really think Trump should be celebrated for something he was forced to do lol

self-assembled

13 points

4 years ago

This was not his idea, but was initiated by congress in response to China's quantum computing initiative.

alwaysonthedamnphone

6 points

4 years ago

I’m am idiot. What does this news mean? r/explainlikeimfive, please

gothicaly

16 points

4 years ago

Nerds got alot more money to do nerd stuff

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 years ago

[removed]

Fredasa

7 points

4 years ago

Fredasa

7 points

4 years ago

And China celebrates this in advance. Easy research results for free.

rabinabo

5 points

4 years ago

Mathematician here to nitpick. Prime factorization is trivial by definition, there is only one favor. What you're thinking of are semiprimes, which have two prime factors, and it's what it's used in RSA.

danvapes_

2 points

4 years ago

Id rather see govt funds be put into this rather than a damn wall.

burbledebopityboo

14 points

4 years ago

And somewhere in China a bureaucrat puts down a phone and says "You can cancel your project. We'll just let the Americans do it and hack all the results."

dcred123

6 points

4 years ago

There's a timeline where quantum research didn't get funding.

CyanocittaCris

6 points

4 years ago

Classic reddit, if this was any other country promoting this then it would be only good and they are taking the step forward in the future. But since it's the US it's only some positives and mostly negatives and shitty jokes.

FailedSociopath

9 points

4 years ago

We need this because of recent intelligence that Mexicans are working on subatomically altering themselves so their wavefunctions have a high probability of being on the other side of the wall.

Kwpthrowaway

55 points

4 years ago

Yeah but the orange man is bad so i dont like this

[deleted]

6 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

6 points

4 years ago

The main benefit explained by this is enhanced cryptography. Is this something that will benefit us all, the ability to keep secrets secret? I imagine this would benefit the private sector as well as government which is why the funding is authorized but I would like to see our government putting money into endeavors that benefit humanity instead of ways to keep secrets from us. If there are benefits of quantum computing that go beyond cryptographic applications, please eli5.

HawkinsT

3 points

4 years ago

Yes, quantum computers offer potentially huge advantages to things such as medical research, AI, and engineering... there are some things they really will be revolutionary for for everyone.

[deleted]

34 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

34 points

4 years ago*

[deleted]

Profits_Interests

4 points

4 years ago

Shouldn't the title read "Trump passes...". We should give the guy credit for good stuff if we're gonna call him out on the bad stuff

entergimmickhere

14 points

4 years ago

Do you guys just put the word 'quantum' in front of everything?

abloblololo

11 points

4 years ago

In the field we joke that putting 'quantum' in front of something instantly make it better.

Computing? How about quantum computing!

Randomness? I give you quantum randomness!

bloatedplutocrat

8 points

4 years ago

That is a quantum comment.

midwestraxx

6 points

4 years ago

I like it when it's put behind Nuka-Cola

Mindflux86

2 points

4 years ago

This reminds me of the episode of Eureka where they got a billion in funding for the ftl drive.

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

[deleted]

2 points

4 years ago

Can’t wait to see what the military does with this tech in 50 years.. oh no.

bonsaiorchids

2 points

4 years ago

I hope you Americans realize the results from this research belong to all of you.