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

Rigetti Computing to go public

rigetti.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 83 posts

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#71

Post by solveit »

whatever1 wrote: post #68
crispyambulance wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be right, but then what should they be valued at? It's ultimately a gamble for something that's some unknown distance beyond the horizon but would, if fully realized, actually change the world.

The valuation implies that there is 1.5% probability of this company becoming BP with a market cap of 100B and bringing 10B in profits per year. That is with a technology that currently is not working, and is not expected to work in useful scale for decades.

Or a 0.15% probability of becoming 10x bigger. For things like this, essentially all the expected value is in the very long tail. I won't be buying shares any time soon, but more power to those who do.

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#72

Post by systemvoltage »

10x_contrarian wrote: post #62

Anyone considering investing in Regetti should take a look at the company's negative reviews on glassdoor. They paint a picture of a highly disfunctional organization struggling with behind-the-curve tech driven on hubris and the ego of its founder. Some people note the irony of him being married to the famous Uber whistleblower while creating a corporate culture that's comprable to early Uber in many ways. Rigetti i…

To be fair, Glassdoor always has negative comments for most companies due to the reporting bias (only disappointed employees take the effort to voice their concerns).

It is a cliche amongst recruiters around the dreaded Glassdoor questions during hiring process.

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#73

Post by anon_rigetti »

sbilstein wrote: post #64
10x_contrarian wrote: post #62

Anyone considering investing in Regetti should take a look at the company's negative reviews on glassdoor. They paint a picture of a highly disfunctional organization struggling with behind-the-curve tech driven on hubris and the ego of its founder. Some people note the irony of him being married to the famous Uber whistleblower while creating a corporate culture that's comprable to early Uber in many ways. Rigetti i…

Yea I’ve heard horror stories from friends. CEO writing “athletic, no kids, submissive like a ** woman” in his internal job description for an executive assistant.

Can confirm. Also, heard an "admin" who was also CEO's ex-housekeeper got >$1M severance right before the wife went public with the Uber story.

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#74

Post by krastanov »

1001101 wrote: post #47
krastanov wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Full-stack" is not an official term, but it is a reasonable way to refer to "working on both creating the low level hardware (e.g. transmons), the intermediate layer (error correction that makes the many physical qubits into a few reliable logical qubits), and the higher levels of algorithms for useful applications". There is no "scalable" quantum computer in existence yet. If we can make a million qubits of quality…

I would imagine Shor's algorithm adds some friction to scaling, and who can be permitted to use scaled systems in the near term.

I do not see how Shor's algorithm, just one among my quantum algorithms, brings anything to the question of scaling.

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#75

Post by krastanov »

krastanov wrote: post #74
1001101 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would imagine Shor's algorithm adds some friction to scaling, and who can be permitted to use scaled systems in the near term.

I do not see how Shor's algorithm, just one among my quantum algorithms, brings anything to the question of scaling.

Pardon the typo: "many", not "my"

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#76

Post by freemint »

Frost1x wrote: post #41
boringg wrote: post #27

Is quantum computing the new AI in terms of overhype and under deliver? Honestly curious, not trolling.

What technology isn't overhyped and under delivered? It's pretty difficult to get anyone remotely interested in technology unless they think it's going to be revolutionary and/or make them rich. I used to push back against the ridiculous overselling but I instead decided to join the club. If you tackle impossible problems and fail, people understand unlike when you tackle incredibly difficult problems people think ar…

> What technology isn't overhyped and under delivered?

Electricity, the printing press, ...

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#77

Post by phyalow »

mathgenius wrote: post #43
phyalow wrote: post #16

I'll pass on it, I know several researchers that work there, they are all privately convinced nothing meaningful will happen for 10+years.

That sounds reasonable. On the other hand, if a quantum computer dropped out of the sky tomorrow, virtually no one would know what to do with it. So there is plenty of infrastructure, tooling and know-how that needs to be produced in that 10+ year timeframe. And there will likely be huge demand for all of these things as big co's scramble to get on the bandwagon.

I agree, although IMO its not clear Rigetti is poised to capture and realise the value of quantum tooling. In anycase its a company worth keeping an eye on, but I suspect they are closer to IBM Watson than Bell Laboratories.

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#78

Post by 1001101 »

krastanov wrote: post #74
1001101 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would imagine Shor's algorithm adds some friction to scaling, and who can be permitted to use scaled systems in the near term.

I do not see how Shor's algorithm, just one among my quantum algorithms, brings anything to the question of scaling.

No worries on the typo, and sorry if I said something dumb :) - I know I have something to learn here. I'm a layperson whose knowledge is basically the first chapter of an introductory undergrad text (although when I have time, I will dig into more). Perhaps I didn't get the terminology right, but I was thinking in terms of their total addressable market, depending on the quantity and quality of the qubits, they wont' be able to hand the keys to the castle of public key cryptography (so Shor's algorithm) to just anyone. Maybe that's baked into their business plan. Then I thought of some ways one might still probably get a bit done in this respect with a smaller number of qubits if SAT is in BQP (very half-baked idea), but from what I googled, it sounds like that's an open question.

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#79

Post by krastanov »

1001101 wrote: post #78
krastanov wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not see how Shor's algorithm, just one among my quantum algorithms, brings anything to the question of scaling.

No worries on the typo, and sorry if I said something dumb :) - I know I have something to learn here. I'm a layperson whose knowledge is basically the first chapter of an introductory undergrad text (although when I have time, I will dig into more). Perhaps I didn't get the terminology right, but I was thinking in terms of their total addressable market, depending on the quantity and quality of the qubits, they wont…

I can not know for sure, but I doubt that this worry is on their mind. By the time these machines are reliable enough to do prime factorization, we would have had plenty of opportunities to move to "post quantum" public cryptography schemes that are as resilient to quantum attacks as they are to classical (cloudflare and google chrome have already implemented experimental HTTPS variants that are resilient). I doubt that Shor's algorithm would ever be a "killer app", because only a small fraction of encryption algorithms are susceptible to such an attack (it is not too far fetched to say that it is just a historical happenstance that our standard public encryption schemes happen to be susceptible).

Re: Rigetti Computing to go public

#80

Post by 1001101 »

krastanov wrote: post #79
1001101 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No worries on the typo, and sorry if I said something dumb :) - I know I have something to learn here. I'm a layperson whose knowledge is basically the first chapter of an introductory undergrad text (although when I have time, I will dig into more). Perhaps I didn't get the terminology right, but I was thinking in terms of their total addressable market, depending on the quantity and quality of the qubits, they wont…

I can not know for sure, but I doubt that this worry is on their mind. By the time these machines are reliable enough to do prime factorization, we would have had plenty of opportunities to move to "post quantum" public cryptography schemes that are as resilient to quantum attacks as they are to classical (cloudflare and google chrome have already implemented experimental HTTPS variants that are resilient). I doubt t…

I see my error, and I will sleep better at night (these are things I worry about). Thanks for your time!
Post reply on HN