461
submitted 11 months ago by boem@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 69 points 11 months ago

This really is amazing to see. It feels like just year when we were discussing 1, 2, or 10 qubits.

Are there any/many current uses for these quantum computers?

[-] 800XL@lemmy.world 38 points 11 months ago

breaking encryption algorithms

[-] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago

From what i heard, even 1,000 qubits isn't close to enough for modern passwords: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00017-0

[-] Rin@lemm.ee 26 points 11 months ago

Paywall. Also, passwords and RSA are two different things.

[-] aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works 13 points 11 months ago

Reversing hashing algos is what people mean when they talk about quantum computers cracking passwords / encryption, though.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 11 months ago

No, they mean breaking RSA. The industry standard methods of storing passwords are resistant to QC attacks. Passwords could be broken while being passed between client and server under existing algorithms, but not the databases they're stored in.

[-] rishabh@discuss.tchncs.de 32 points 11 months ago

For now they are only being used for research purposes. For example, simulating Quantum effects in many atom physics and implementing error correction for future quantum computers. Any real applications still need some time but the pace of development is really quite something.

[-] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 11 points 11 months ago

Wasn't there a study that, with the current approach of evaluating an average to break it down to a few finite states, they might never be able to do for what they were developed; cracking passwords?

[-] frezik@midwest.social 24 points 11 months ago

If by "cracking passwords" you mean reversing password hashes in a database, quantum computers aren't going to make a big dent there. The standard industry ways of doing that wouldn't be affected much by QCs. Breaking encryption, OTOH, with QCs is a concern, but also vastly overrated. It would take orders of magnitude more qubits to pull off than what's been worked on so far, and it may not be feasible to juggle that many qubits in a state of superposition.

I get really annoyed when people focus on breaking encryption with QCs. They are far more interesting and useful than that.

QC can make logistics more efficient. Have you ever seen photos of someone unpacking a giant Amazon box holding one little micro SD card? Amazon isn't dumb about these things, but our best methods of packing an entire truck is a guess. Packing algorithms would take too long to calculate how to perfectly pack it, so they come up with a solution that seems OK, and that leads to a few "filler" boxes that are unnecessarily large, among other inefficiencies. QC can solve this problem without taking the age of the universe to come up with a solution.

The order in which that truck delivers those packages can also be made more efficient with QC.

Then there's molecular simulations, which have the promise of making medications that are more effective, more likely to pass trials, and with fewer side effects. This can be done far faster on a QC.

[-] ADON15@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Interesting, I’ve only really heard of breaking encryption with them. Is there already a proven algorithm for packing that could be reasonably done with a qc not too far into the future

[-] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I dont think that the only use of Quantum computers is password cracking, rather that one of the types of work loads thats much easier on a quantum computer.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago
[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

Man, if something like this could make crypto obsolete, I would laugh like a mf.

[-] Luisp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 11 months ago

It mines all possible bitcoins and it's over for the rest of crypto too

[-] hansl@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

There’d just be new cryptocurrencies. There are crypto algorithms that are already quantum resistant. Monero is a great example.

You seem to be under the impression that crypto somewhat relies on current technology to exist. It’s a set of heuristics and algorithms, not a single implementation. And those can evolve for new use cases or technologies.

What you said is akin to “if something like this could make databases obsolete”.

[-] Redredme@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

The question, the problem with crypto, is not how, it's why?

It isn't about if we can or cannot. It's about the usecase of it all.

For now, the only use case crypto has is wel... Betting. It's hard to call it anything else like speculation.

You would be out of your mind to use it as a currency. The worth of crypto is too volatile. Even black market usage is problematic due to this. (did i just buy a pound of coke for 50k or 100k? Who knows? I guess we see tomorrow)

It also is too slow to use as a currency; the transaction times are off the charts compared to other forms.

It also is the most wasteful form for storing wealth.

It's also the most risky way for storing wealth. The amount of hacks and scams are insane.

It, in its current form will never be a legal tender. Currency is about control for governments, to devalue or not, to prop up the economy, boosting it or easing it down when needed and crypto doesn't provide that. So to use that wealth you'll always need an exchange. A third party. Which, recent history has thought us, are very prone to abuse and regulation. they can be banned overnight. (China comes to mind)

It's a solution. The question is for what. The popularity of it all is based on 2 things : greed and the fear of missing out. (which again boils down to greed)

[-] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world -3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Not how it works as far as I know. If people start mining with a quantum computers the difficulty will increase making it even more secure (one of bitcoins main features). Traditional computers will drop out due to lack of rewards and more powerful quantum computers will enter and compete with the original quantum computers and the cycle continues. It’s a self balancing system.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 11 months ago

QC would be completely devastating to bitcoin. Anyone with a sufficient QC could break any block of the bitcoin chain they want, essentially giving all the bitcoins to themselves. There are other cryptocurrencies that are quantum-resistant, but bitcoin itself would be done.

[-] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I would assume in the face of that the bitcoin network would have to change its consensus to include quantum resistance. I think this is possible but not sure

[-] Nighed@sffa.community 2 points 11 months ago

But you have control of the network with a majority of mining right? So it's very possible that one or more organisations could control it for long enough that it's not trusted?

And how does proof of stake work cryptography?

[-] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I’m not really a great source for this stuff but I would assume that the quantum computer would have to be more powerful than all of the other mining compute combined for that to happen. Then it would have to be so far ahead that no new quantum computers were coming online to compete against it.

The other part is incentive. If you want to take over 50% of the network the incentive wouldn’t be to double spend because once it’s detected the price collapses due to lack of trust, bitcoins fundamentals change and it’s no longer decentralised effectively making it another centralised shitcoin. There could be incentive for a government to do this or a rival currency but bitcoin is fundamental to all crypto currencies so they would be damaging themselves greatly in the process.

I can’t answer your proof of stake question with any confidence

this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2023
461 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

59144 readers
2645 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS