Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 281 posts

Re: Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

#121

Post by logtrees »

udev4096 wrote: post #113
aantix wrote: post #64

Is Bitcoin in jeopardy?

[flagged]

I don't consider the current system to be worthless. In fact, it functions remarkably well. There is certainly room for additional substrate layers though, and Bitcoin being digital or electronic gold and Ethereum being an e-steam engine or e-computer make for a powerful combination for applications together. I agree that the crowd here has historically not understood, or wanted to understand, the underlying protocols and what is possible. A bizarre kind of hubris perhaps, or maybe just a response to how the first iterations of a web2.5 or web3.0 were...admittedly more mired in a kind of marketing hype that was not as reflective of what is possible and sustainable in the space due to there not being realistic web and engineering muscle at the forefront of the hype.

I think this current cycle is going to change that though. The kinds of projects spinning up are truly massive, innovative, and interesting. Stay tuned!

Re: Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

#123

Post by bloppe »

andrewla wrote: post #61
bilsbie wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see why bitcoin wouldn’t update its software in such a case. The majority of minors just need to agree. But why wouldn’t they if the alternative is going to zero?

How could updating the software possibly make a difference here? If the encryption is cracked, then who is to say who owns which Bitcoin? As soon as I try to transfer any coin that I own, I expose my public key, your "Quantum Computer" cracks it, and you offer a competing transaction with a higher fee to send the Bitcoin to your slush fund. No amount of software fixes can update this. In theory once an attack becomes…

> would require all holders (not miners) to actively update their wallets. Basically infeasible.

It doesn't require all holders to update their wallets. Some people would fail to do so and lose their money. That doesn't mean the rest of the network can't do anything to save themselves. Most people use hosted wallets like Coinbase these days anyway, and Coinbase would certainly be on top of things.

Also, you don't need to break ECDSA to break BTC. You could also do it by breaking mining. The block header has a 32-bit nonce at the very end. My brain is too smooth to know how realistic this actually is, but perhaps someone could do use a QC to perform the final step of SHA-256 on all 2^32 possible values of the nonce at once, giving them an insurmountable advantage in mining. If only a single party has that advantage, it breaks the Nash equilibrium.

But if multiple parties have that advantage, I suppose BTC could survive until someone breaks ECDSA. All those mining ASICs would become worthless, though.

Re: Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

#124

Post by nine_k »

FabHK wrote: post #100

So, "verifiable" here means "we ran it twice and got the same result"? > Quantum verifiability means the result can be repeated on our quantum computer — or any other of the same caliber — to get the same answer, confirming the result.

It means that they transcended the "works on my machine" stage, and can reliably run a quantum algorithm on more than one different quantum computer.

Re: Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

#126

Post by DrNosferatu »

I would like to hear from the classical computation people if they validate these results and claims:

As many times in the past quantum supremacy was claimed, and then, other groups have shown they can do better with optimized classical methods.

Re: Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

#127

Post by udev4096 »

logtrees wrote: post #121
udev4096 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I don't consider the current system to be worthless. In fact, it functions remarkably well. There is certainly room for additional substrate layers though, and Bitcoin being digital or electronic gold and Ethereum being an e-steam engine or e-computer make for a powerful combination for applications together. I agree that the crowd here has historically not understood, or wanted to understand, the underlying protocol…

[flagged]

Re: Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

#128

Post by cluckindan »

nine_k wrote: post #124
FabHK wrote: post #100

So, "verifiable" here means "we ran it twice and got the same result"? > Quantum verifiability means the result can be repeated on our quantum computer — or any other of the same caliber — to get the same answer, confirming the result.

It means that they transcended the "works on my machine" stage, and can reliably run a quantum algorithm on more than one different quantum computer.

They haven’t, though?

Re: Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware

#129

Post by logtrees »

udev4096 wrote: post #127
logtrees wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't consider the current system to be worthless. In fact, it functions remarkably well. There is certainly room for additional substrate layers though, and Bitcoin being digital or electronic gold and Ethereum being an e-steam engine or e-computer make for a powerful combination for applications together. I agree that the crowd here has historically not understood, or wanted to understand, the underlying protocol…

[flagged]

What is it about then? I'm not spreading propaganda - I'm maximally truth seeking and approaching things from a technical/economic/governance point of view and not an ideological one per se. Though ideology shapes everything, what I mean is that I'm not ideologically predisposed towards a conclusion on things. For me what matters is the core, truthy aspects of a given subject.
Post reply on HN