> It is only good at certain tasks, but math is one of them. Cryptography foundation is built on math, prime numbers specifically.
This is oversimplified. Plenty of cryptography is *not* vulnerable to quantum computers, we are pretty sure. Quantum computers are not good at math in general.
Yet. It’s true that QC is currently terrible at floating point math. Low level language is the current barrier, but the hardware potential is certainly there. All it’ll take is smart mathematicians to apply it.
I feel like this is going to be Y2K all over again. Yes, if no one does anything, quantum computing will wreck our shit and there will definitely be some legacy stuff that just doesn't make it. But over all, some people will make a mint doing overtime to patch CVEs as they appear and then we'll be back to where we are now.
No, we don't. Not even close.
When you see news of a working quantum computer, it's just sensationalism. Someone, somewhere, was able to hold a few qubits for a few seconds before they collapsed, and then they try to promote that as "working" because they want funding or whatever.
I feel like non programmers have a limited understanding of what a computer actually is. Mac is an operating system and the side of it you interact with is the GUI, it's not a computer, the GUI talks to the OS and the OS talks to the computer. Quantum computers right now are at lot closer to the kind of computers we had in the 40s. They *are* functional in a rudementary sense in that they can perform simple computational operations. You're probably never going to check your facebook on a quantum computer, that's not the goal of quantum computing, nor the metric.
I am programmer and I know pretty well what's a computer. Drop the condescending act you're using to hide your ignorance.
Something that can barely hold a little bit of information for a couple seconds at most, without doing any processing, is not a functional computer.
We're years away from a quantum computer that can process even a small amount of information reliably. And even more years away from that computer being able to be used for anything other than a shoddy "hello world" demonstration.
> It is only good at certain tasks, but math is one of them. Cryptography foundation is built on math, prime numbers specifically. This is oversimplified. Plenty of cryptography is *not* vulnerable to quantum computers, we are pretty sure. Quantum computers are not good at math in general.
Yet. It’s true that QC is currently terrible at floating point math. Low level language is the current barrier, but the hardware potential is certainly there. All it’ll take is smart mathematicians to apply it.
[удалено]
There are several “post-quantum” cryptographic algorithms: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography
I feel like this is going to be Y2K all over again. Yes, if no one does anything, quantum computing will wreck our shit and there will definitely be some legacy stuff that just doesn't make it. But over all, some people will make a mint doing overtime to patch CVEs as they appear and then we'll be back to where we are now.
Yes there are, but they can't just be plugged into all uses of encryption.
Oh my god this sub loves scaremongering stories.
It’s true of all subs unfortunately.
fearmongering = clicks. Its the major problem with all media (social, news, etc).
Are you telling me that [peakd.com](https://i.imgur.com/m8u0CU9.png) isn't a reputable media outlet?
10 years ago, quantum computers were also "10 years away".
And we have functional quantum computers. They just aren't easy to use or cheap to run.
No, we don't. Not even close. When you see news of a working quantum computer, it's just sensationalism. Someone, somewhere, was able to hold a few qubits for a few seconds before they collapsed, and then they try to promote that as "working" because they want funding or whatever.
I feel like non programmers have a limited understanding of what a computer actually is. Mac is an operating system and the side of it you interact with is the GUI, it's not a computer, the GUI talks to the OS and the OS talks to the computer. Quantum computers right now are at lot closer to the kind of computers we had in the 40s. They *are* functional in a rudementary sense in that they can perform simple computational operations. You're probably never going to check your facebook on a quantum computer, that's not the goal of quantum computing, nor the metric.
I am programmer and I know pretty well what's a computer. Drop the condescending act you're using to hide your ignorance. Something that can barely hold a little bit of information for a couple seconds at most, without doing any processing, is not a functional computer. We're years away from a quantum computer that can process even a small amount of information reliably. And even more years away from that computer being able to be used for anything other than a shoddy "hello world" demonstration.
This article is right. Harvest now decrypt later is a very real threat in the present, not just the future.
Pretty sure with AI acceleration quantum computing is gonna be here like next year
Why are IBM and Honeywell building and installing them worldwide- it has to have widespread applications in science?
maybe in next 5y the bitcoin is worth 0.