Slashdot Mirror
Quantum Computing Using Traditional Transistors
Ocean Consulting writes "UCLA is reporting progress on the quantum computing front by announcing success in controlling the spin of a single electron using an ordinary transistor." It's been a long road for the researchers involved, and even the project lead, Hong Wen Jiang admits, "...our initial theoretical calculations were very favorable, and gave us confidence to persevere."
"With 100 transistors, each containing one of these electrons, you could have the implicit information storage that corresponds to all of the hard disks made in the world this year, multiplied by the number of years the universe has been around," Yablonovitch said. "And why stop with 100 transistors?"
That is pretty amazing.
Cheers!
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
Quantum computing, which holds the promise of nearly unlimited processing power, secure communications and the ability to decode encrypted conversations by terrorists and others, is a significant step closer to becoming a reality today with new research published by a team of UCLA scientists in the journal Nature.
So which is it, secure communications or communications that can be spied on? It can't be both.
That he'll be a script writer for Enterprise starting this season.
From the article:
"With 100 transistors, each containing one of these electrons, you could have the implicit information storage that corresponds to all of the hard disks made in the world this year, multiplied by the number of years the universe has been around," Yablonovitch said. "And why stop with 100 transistors?"
Of course, because with 101 transistors you could store as many Library of Congress as there are electrons in the visible universe on a disk the size of 2 square hogs for a duration of up to 3.4256 parsecs.
Unfortunately, it will take up to as many (1/98742) of year as it took in seconds for Apollo 11 to reach the moon from the launch pad to design such a hard-drive.
Why is it scientists always use weird units? I have absolutely no clue of what "the implicit information storage that corresponds to all of the hard disks made in the world this year, multiplied by the number of years the universe has been around" actually represents in bytes.
Iraq: war to save the U
That should like a LOT of soldering.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
The article said something totally different brfore I clicked it.
I thought about reading the article but will it change if I look at it?
This would be something to help drive down the cost. Quantum computing on the desktop would finally be a evolutionary step in computing. (Up'ing clockspeed constantly and decreasing chip size is not evolutionary.) Though, quantum computing on the desktop probably means time to stop using passwords due to sheer power to brute force them.
:(){
They're actually using pulsed microwave bursts to manipulate the electron's spin, not the transistor itself, really.
From the article:
Quantum computing, which holds the promise of nearly unlimited processing power, secure communications and the ability to decode encrypted conversations by terrorists and others (emphasis mine)
Take special note of the word others, which should be read as everyone. The government will be falling all over themselves to support this research and inherit a technology that makes encryption virtually useless.
I'm all for advancing technology, and no doubt quantum computing will be a great leap forward. It's just a shame that our privacy will be sacrificed in the process.
Urge to post... fading... fading... RISING!... fading... fading... gone.
...to a quantum radio? I want to pull in stations from alternate universes since there is no good local music.
"secure communications and the ability to decode encrypted conversations by terrorists and others"
Why does every article about anything have to have the word "terrorist" in it, these days?
is great. Until the technology becomes ubiquitous enough that even terrorists have access to it. Then what? It's secure...even from us.
If reality was like Slashdot, most people would be (-1) Redundant.
1)You can use quantum transmission to encrypt/ send and to know when your transmission has been intercepted..
2)Quantum computers can be used to factor and solve the large computations needed to crack todays encryption codes in a reasonable time...
What was so hard to understand?
They use these rather than SI units(if there are such things for data) to give an idea of scale.
I think most people reading that sentence will get the impression of it being "a bloody lot". It's more data than we can usefully express in our units. Like measuring the width of the galaxy in metres(the SI unit of distance)
Windows is only $500 if your time is worthless.
Does this have the potential to make Bremermann's limit obsolete or did he have the forsight to take this into account?
I wish physicists would be more cautious in their use of language.
In the article it states: "The UCLA team succeeded in flipping a single electron spin upside down."
Considering that the term 'spin' is just a metaphor for a quantum-mechanical property that has no equivalent in our everyday experience, it makes no sense to talk about 'flipping' it, or the spin being 'upside down'.
Neat achievement though....
A beowulf cluster of those!!
He means:
1 Parsec = 3.08568025 × 10^16 meters
"With 100 transistors, each containing one of these electrons, you could have the implicit information storage that corresponds to all of the hard disks made in the world this year, multiplied by the number of years the universe has been around," Yablonovitch said. "And why stop with 100 transistors?"
I hope this drive lasts longer than the Quantumm Fireball I had.
in bed.
Hong Wen Jiang admits, "...our initial theoretical calculations were very favorable, and gave us confidence to persevere."
Whoa! I don't know what the hell you're talking about, but OK, since you admitted...
I also admit that I'm confident that I'm perverse.
it helps when looking for funding.
Okay, I only skimmed the article (what's that STFA?) but this sounds like BIG news. If this holds true, existing hardware could be used for quantum computing - a very interesting possibility. Well, it's a long way from the science lab to everyday use, but I hope those guys can create something acutally usable throughout commercial computing.
I just had a thought - not sure how you would do this, but if you made devices just to "look at" transmissions that were quantum encrypted, could you prevent the message from ever being received by the intended recipient?
I know entanglement comes into play here, that is, the message doesn't actually have to travel, so you would have to target the devices that send and or receive the messages.
Any thoughts?
Because if you don't immediately say that it (it, as in indefinite pronoun) is a weapon against the terrorists, someone moranic will cry that it will be used by the terrorists. And morans tend to stick together when it comes to irrational fear, so you don't want that.
Cool... With one of these new quantum computers, I should be able to meet the minimum requirements for Doom 4! Now if only I could get my quantum video card to work...
Homer no function beer well without.
>Why is it scientists always use weird units? I have absolutely no clue of what "the implicit information storage that corresponds to all of the hard disks made in the world this year, multiplied by the number of years the universe has been around" actually represents in bytes.
6.0 X 10^8 drives x 100 GB/drive x 15 x 10^9 years x 1.1 x 10^9 bytes/GB = 9.9 x 10^29 bytes. More or less. Definitely a BFN. This should be enough for most mp3 and pr0n collections. For reference, the number of electrons in the universe is estimated at 10^79, a larger BFN.Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
"UCLA is reporting progress on the quantum computing front by announcing success in controlling the spin of a single electron using an ordinary transistor."
How does that constitute progress in quantum computing? I have been hearing about progress in quantum computing for a long time now. Sounds like a bunch of people who are afraid to lose their government grants and funding.
I can't wait for the day when quantum computing is revealed for what it is, a silly hoax and a fraud.
600,000 1.8 inch drives per month according to a very quick google search. Total monthly production of all drives from all manufactureres will certainly exceed 1,000,000.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Republicans spin to the left, Liberals to the right and democrats just sit there? Or is it Republicans to the right, Democrats to the left and Liberals do nothing? Or it is...
Dang! now I'm too dizzy to vote
Welcome to the net of 1000 lies. Upgrades are scheduled soon that should bring us to the 10,000 lies mark.
if you are for catching terrorists then you get government funding and avoid investigation.
I you don't explicitly make the statement, you are instantly cast into suspicion..
Welcome to this 'brave new world'... Exactly what Binny boy wanted..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The article mentions 10 years until it may be commercially feasible. But this probably means insanely expensive for all but huge corporations and government. How long are we looking at until something like this comes into daily lives like the PC?
Mod points are pointless when you browse at -1.
DONT LOOK AT IT !!!
It might go away...
stupid lameness filter stupid lameness filter
too many caps jackasses too many caps jackasses
too bad you had to see this too bad you had to read this
i dont think we should be using this technology...imagine if we inadvertenly open a portal to a world full of cro-mags. they will then slide over here and enslave us with their highly evolved technology!
if they do take our world and put us into re-education camps, i would certainly hope that they would play "Red Sector A" on the camp's PA all day.
<prayer>oh jerry o'connell, forgive the scientists for they know not what they do. also, please protect us from the evil cro-mags.</prayer>
amen.
Can anyone with more perspective on this, clue me in on what this really means? It seems like it would be a big breakthrough in quantum computing, making full on Quantum systems a possibility within a decade or so. Is this accurate, or are there still many more problems to solve that are more important than this one?
Once you understand the state they're in the rules have changed ;)
Privacy is terrorism.
Oh, you mean the ones that use human couriers to relay messages? The ones that live in caves with no access to computers?
No, this technology is not going to be used on terrorists. It is going to be used on a combination of normal people suspected of criminal activity (ie anyone who bothers to encrypt their communications) and actual hightech criminals.
This technology will be effectively useless at stopping the terrorists we are worried about.
I Google-whacked 'quantum-computing Clear-Channel' and already got 63 hits.
Cue the obligatory quake III joke ..
*SMACK*
This would be an accurate description, only it's not.
If you perform the double-slit experiment with twenty humans, a canon, and segments of brick walls, you don't wind up with an interference pattern. With electrons, you do. Also, factoring with quantum computers has been successfully performed, so we know it works.
If it makes you feel better, it isn't just a matter of treating statistics as physical reality. It's more a matter of realizing that at certain small sizes, 'matter' isn't exactly matter. It's closer to energy, and has a wave behavior similar to energy. It just happens that measurable physical properties can only be said to exist when the wave function has 'collapsed'.
(I expect some QM geek will want to correct my explanation, but it's certainly more accurate than your attempt. Happy trolling!)
The actual article to appear in Nature can be found here, which I found at the CNSI web page.
:)
I only wish that CNSI will complete construction before I graduate with my Master's in CS... Seems like it will be a great facility to do research on this sort of thing. Oh well, there's always CENS
- shadowmatter
I was willing to forgive a little hype until the idiocy about terrorists. Decided maybe I was just cranky, then read:
While flipping a single electron was difficult, detecting that they had actually done so proved even harder. "We couldn't tell whether it was flipping," Jiang said. "It was like looking for a needle in a haystack."
Wow, I'm so illuminated by this "needle in a haystack" imagery. Before it I had no idea what was going on, but now it all seems so clear.
This article blows. Can we get something better on slashdot please? Something that doesn't make me feel I'm being lumped in with people who need things drastically dumbed down, and/or rationalized in the name of "fighting terrorists"?
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
Wrong analogy on the macroscopic level.
Macroscopically if I do the double-slit experiment using REGULAR waves in a tub of water I DO get the result you would expect -- interference patterns. Noone would reasonably claim that there were any quantum states anywhere in that system. Yet shrink it down orders of magnitude and I'm told to discount everything about entities? No -- sorry.
Also you need to understand that I am not discounting quantum theory -- I'm discounting a particular aspect of physical interpretation. And I am a QM geek (amateur) and I have stumped more than one physics professor on this particular point. (There is no satisfactory answer at present.)
When all is said and done I bet that we will have quantum computation -- but it will just be ultrafast classical computation.
I agree! This article is ridiculous.
Anyhow, they seem to be missing the point. This isn't actually related to true quantum computing at all!
Quantum computing would use states of atoms or molecules where the multiplicty would allow for many more states. In other words, switching spin states in a single electron gives you up or down (binary.) Switching states in an atom can give you different values depending on the particular atom. A typical small atom could give you 3 or 4 distinct states. This might let you do arithmetic in some base other than 2!
We already have binary.
I get a positive Crackpot Index just from this three line posting of his. And that's without even taking a shot at that "God gave us the secret to AI" website. I think my calculator might run out of digits...
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
...will it run Doom3 smoothly? Also, will it transform Duke Nukem Forever into Duke Nukem Now?
"I put my mouth where my money is at"
Life is not for the lazy.
Say you have an algorithm that needs to store all numbers from 0 to 2^100, then the algorithm excludes sets of them until arriving at an answer. The algorithm might truly need 2^100 words of 100 bits each to proceed on a classical computer, but on a quantum computer the calculation chugs along on our implicit storage until it arrives at an answer. As long as we never know the states of the implicit storage as the calculation unfolds it works, but we have at most 100 bits to read at the end of the calculation, and can only store 100 bits before the calculation. But this is the ultimate parallel computation, because each step in our calculations is working on all the numbers in our "implicit storage" at one time. The trick is getting the numbers to settle down and converge on one classical answer that can be read. See things like the Shor algorithm for composite number factoring.
To fill our memory with every number before starting the calculation would take one hundred steps, each setting one bit in both on and off, but entangled with all other bits.
Sorry, no unlimited pr0n storage for /. users. In effect, every JPEG is in memory, you just can't view any of them. A decided disadvantage for pr0n :-)
Letter To Iran
Quantum communication is already practical, and provides a secure way to communicate to replace factoring-based encryption, which quantum computation may one day make insecure. The hype in this article, though, is way over the top. 100 electron spins can only encode 100 classical bits. Not one bit extra. Yablonovitch is using a very sloppy way of talking about how hard it is to simulate 100 spins, and making it sound like he's talking about a way to store a lot of classical bits! His "implicit information storage" is nonsense. It's also worth mentioning that quantum computation is unlikely to speed up any computation you care about, unless you like to simulate quantum systems. Fast factoring is the "killer app" that got people excited about this field, but "terrorists" (and the rest of us) can just stop using factoring-based encryption.
Yep. So what? I never said it the 100 electrons couldn't represent the information.
However, my 100 regular bits will quite nicely represent 2^100 states just as well. In fact my 256 megs of bits in my laptop can outstrip the possible states any day.
What they (nor the q-computer) will ever do is represent 2^100 states all at the same time and perform some miraculous quantum collapse calculation.
Sigh. And then we can reformulate everything in a Clifford Algebra using classical axioms and get the same exact results but proving that QM computation is a chimera. So what! Use your head. At any moment in time the damnable 100 electrons are in a *particular* state -- and thus *cannot* be coerced into representing 2^100 states simultaneously.
It's failure to see that an epistemological potential is not a physical reality and this traverses the whole of QM as it presently exists. Absurd conclusions of computing power all rest on the premise that I can hold two or more states in superimposition until I need to calculate. The only reason this nonsense exists is because of mis-interpretation of a particular aspect of QM.
Wishing you well. You get the last word if you want it but I go to go back to my day job -- cancer research.
You said : "This idea that the electon is in some fuzzy position described by its probability is an epistemological statement -- not a physical one. The electron wave is somewhere 100% of the time in definite form." But a wave does not have a definite position because the energy is spread out over some region of space, so we can only give a proability of the wave being at a particular point at a particular time. The double slit experiment "proves" that electrons are waves, whilst the photoelectric effect "proves" that electrons are particles (and not waves). Classical mechanics is inadequate to describe these kinds of behaviour, hence the development of quantum mechanics. But what you find with quantum mechanics is that as the wave / particle size increases the results are identical with classical mechanics. A good example of this is the simple harmonic oscillator. It's all good stuff.
Well, I did say "area" in the sentence that followed.
Again, 100 years of brainwashing and folks think you can't describe it "classically". Of course you can. It only requires that the impacting wave be smaller than the surface it's impacting and the area integrals associated to momentum/energy transfer do the rest. But that's if I wanted to be a real pain. You are fundamentally correct.
I am attacking a very small part of QM -- something that does not invalidate for example, either quantization, wave packets etc. I'm attacking the notion that the particle is indefinite because given HUP I don't have an exact measurement. And downstream this leads to all sorts of nonsense, including the absurd notions of the power of QM computation.
What they did appears to be just flipping the spin (and detecting the flip) of a single electron.
Creating and measuring the quantum state of a single particle is *not* new. Or that hard. The neat thing is that they did it with a commercial transistor.
Oh, and some sort of fridge that goes to -400 F.
The really hard part in quantum computing (as far as I can tell) is (a) creating and (b) maintaining a coherence between many particles.
The problem is that useful coherences between particles are *very* easily destroyed. If you can hold coherent mixtures one the order of milliseconds, consider yourself lucky. Much less creating the state and performing the operations and then reading out the state...
Muerte
I'd love to read that, but I don't feel like paying for a subscription.
Do these researchers call themselves "quantum spin doctors" or just plain "quantum mechanics"?
I love it when people spew out their theories of why quantum mechanics is wrong - just because they can't understand it.
When you say things like this you sound like the guys trying to sell "Zero Point Energy" and the like.
Go read a book. For starters, I recommend Griffiths.
Muerte
Welcome to Windows Quantum 2006! We crash several ways at the same time!
The following link may be helpful for those of us who are a little fuzzy on quantum computing: http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~westside/quantum-intro. html
In fact, all you have to do is double the key size (in bits) on something like RSA to make it just as hard to break with a quantum computer as the original was with a regular computer. Quantum computing can only reduce the time required to perform the decription by a square root factor, but since the decription runtime is basically O(2^N), where N is the number of bits in the key, all you have to do is double N.
I gave it a shot last week in my livejournal. Hope this helps.
-Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
...mostly the government uses "one time pads". They're immune to any decryption because for an encrypted message of length N, any plaintext of length N is identically plausible. The way to break govenment encryption is to copy the pads, or subvert the guy who gets to read the plaintext.
I'm attacking...the absurd notions of the power of QM computation.
shor's factoring algorithm has successfully been run on a quantum computer on the number 15, producing the correct prime factors (3 and 5). the computer used 7 qubits for the computation.
google it...it had something to do with ibm research. i searched for quantum computer factor 15 and it turned up a few articles about it.
Until you click the mouse and collapse the wave form, your Windows box will be crashed and not crashed simultaneously.
As someone who has taken a course in quantum computing, I can tell you that this article has numerous inaccuracies and misleading statements. The section you highlight is an example. Many current encryption algorithms are based on the fact that it is difficult to factor large numbers (products of two primes). An algorithm for doing so efficiently has already been developed for quantum computers. So, as soon as we can build quantum computers (larger than a few qbits), today's toughest encryption algorithms will essentially become obsolete overnight.
However, quantum computing also provides a secure means of communication. This means of communication is not secure because it uses some fancy cryptographic coding; it is "secure" because of the way it makes use of quantum physics, as opposed to classical physics. In essence, if two parties are communicating through a quantum channel using a secure quantum communication protocol, it is impossible for a third party to eavesdrop on the conversation. Note: I really mean impossible. Not just "difficult but maybe possible in the future with more processing power". I mean impossible as in doing so would require breaking the laws of physics (as we understand them today). An attempt to eavesdrop would (a) irrecoverably corrupt the data being communicated, and (b) be detectable by both parties (so they could halt communications as soon as the attempt to eavesdrop was detected). The probability that an eavesdropper would be successfull is vanishingly small. I.e., the eavesdropper would basically have to "guess" correctly for each bit of the communication.
So, the statement the article makes is innane. Sure, existing encryption algorithms will be easily breakable with quantum computers. But because of that, no one who cares about security will use them anymore. What's to stop terrorists from using their own quantum computers and communication channels? It will be as impossible for the government to intercept their communications as it will be for terrorists to intercept the government's communications. The same goes for the average user - you and me.
Our privacy may be "sacrificed" for a short transitionary period (in which some people have quantum computers but others still use classical encryption), but this will only last until quantum computers become commercially viable. Quantum computing is a big win for our privacy in the long run!
Karma: pi (Mostly due to circular reasoning in posts).
Sir:
Your sig is irrational.
Just thought you'd like to know that.
Now if they find some way to reduce brownian motion, or to possibly even predict it, then it may be possible to compensate for... but I won't hold my breath.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Actually rain prediction doesn't work like it sounds at all. 70% chance of rain really means that it will rain on 70% of the described area.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Shame they already have, then. OK, so the current record for quantum computation is calculating that 15 = 3 x 5, but it's a start...
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Portable improbability drive, atomic vector plotter, nice hot cup of tea.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Chill out! Maybe to " minus more than 400 degrees Fahrenheit." - perhaps? :->
...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
well thats got my head spinning
in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that
Francis Smit
just 2 trillion songs for storeage.
pre installed with all songs made by all human history, $9.95.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Look closely at the article - they claim that the manipulation (or, rather, detection) of single electron spin is the revolutionary thing, but they also mention manipulation charge of an electron, now that's revolutionary if you ask me.
I somehow suspect the scientific value of this press release (even if the research would be worth something)...
You want valves for a warmer sounding quantum computing experience.
You don't need a lab to make mud.
Starting with ... secure communications and the ability to decode encrypted conversations by terrorists and others,
Quantum computing,
then continuing furtherup with
When quantum computing becomes a reality, the government may be able to use it to eavesdrop on terrorists and quickly break sophisticated secret codes.
What a brave new world we have, when every new technology we discover is immediately primed towards a most 'noble cause' as allowing the government to invade on (amongst a minority of others) innocent people's privacy.
Get your thoughts of that subject and start thinking about some of the following uses instead:
- cancer treatment research
- exploration of physics laws
- assistance in discovering stronger materials
- intelligent systems
And I bet there is much more good use out there.
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
Oh the good old days of transistors and radio valves !
Chris ,
Php Programmers.
But anyways, right now, it looks as if scientists are trying to produce an electrion with spin=0 instead.
Oh, the date, you say? Then look at this link!
(From the article): Perhaps future elections will be held using secure quantum voting.
Gives new meaning to the term "spin doctor".
well if this quantum state thing is so difficul to ...)
achive, maybe there's a reason for this?
i mean in classical computing, electrons aren't
"really" the information, they're just simulating
logic.
(i think it is possible to implement a logical
gate with a dam and some channels
in quantum computing, i take it, the electrons ARE
the information. so we ARE using something that
exists as is in the univers and maybe the universe
isn't to happy about this?
maybe there's is way more to gain from "real"
electrons, like, think free energy?
"Actually" that's not right. It means there's a 70% chance of rain falling somewhere in the area of interest during the 24 hours in question.
There are many possible different interpretations, I actually got curious enough to look it up a few weeks ago. Sorry I'm not motivated enough to find a link for you... ;-)
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
Don't you mean Doom 3? Yeah, I know since the specs were released Doom 3 requirement jokes aren't funny anymore.
However, quantum computing also provides a secure means of communication.
Not really. The fact is that these two technologies are totally independent - it is quite possible to achieve one of them while being a long way from the other.
For instance, quantum encryption (non-eavesdroppable comm) is already on the high-end commercial market. Quantum computing (quick factorization) is not. IBM factored 15 into 3 and 5 with a quantum computer, but their approach doesn't scale. Lots of labs are working on this.
Now, many people see quantum encryption as the logical answer to quantum computing. It is, but not a very practical answer. Remember that you have to have a direct physical connection to use quantum encryption. Alternatively you should build a chain of quantum links, and then trust all routers, switches etc. along the way. Not very useful for Internet traffic.
Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
If this is the case, would this make shared computing almost certain at some future point? Or do I misunderstand the technology?
Mod points are pointless when you browse at -1.
It's been a long road for the researchers involved, and even the project lead, Hong Wen Jiang admits, "...our initial theoretical calculations were very favorable, and gave us confidence to persevere."
/three cheers for weird phrasing
So, it's been a long journey, and no-one less than the project leader is forced to admit that... he didn't think the project would fail?
What a tough thing to admit.
Now if they find some way to reduce brownian motion, or to possibly even predict it
Chaos theory anyone ? or even better - "PI"
Go grab those torrents.
With the advancement of Quantum Computing we must call into question our own existence. There is a philisophical theory that exists, which states:
A race of intelligent lifeforms reached the technological advancement of quantum computing and we are living in a simulated world running on a quantum computer the size of a laptop. When we finally achieve quantum computing would it not be interesting to simulate our entire evolution in extreme detail. If we are able to accurately simulate the universe then it is feasible that it has already been done and we are the simulation.
"Why is it scientists always use weird units? I have absolutely no clue of what "the implicit information storage that corresponds to all of the hard disks made in the world this year, multiplied by the number of years the universe has been around" actually represents in bytes." Lets see..... Universe age 11,200,000,000 x 30,000,000 hard drives = 336,000,000,000,000,000 336,000,000,000,000,000/8 = 42,000,000,000,000,000 bytes so thats 42 Exabytes THAT'S ALL!? Man ...................
A atomic vector plotter would come in very handy when demodulalizing the qubit superstates. unfortunly there is no such thing as a atomic vector plotter (yet)
i recommend Perry Rhodan
Of course, data "transmission" via entangled electrons would be instantaneous and not subject to interception...
42
...I hope this ends up with a machine fast enough to work with.