Slashdot Mirror
Quantum Computer Security? NASA Doesn't Want To Talk About It (csoonline.com)
itwbennett writes: At a press event at NASA's Advanced Supercomputer Facility in Silicon Valley on Tuesday, the agency was keen to talk about the capabilities of its D-Wave 2X quantum computer. 'Engineers from NASA and Google are using it to research a whole new area of computing — one that's years from commercialization but could revolutionize the way computers solve complex problems,' writes Martyn Williams. But when questions turned to the system's security, a NASA moderator quickly shut things down [VIDEO], saying the topic was 'for later discussion at another time.'
It's a news conference and they likely weren't prepared to field security questions. That doesn't mean the security is lacking. It just isn't what they were there to talk about.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
I'm wondering if this fits in with this story about a quantum computing grant for IBM, as well: http://www.zdnet.com/article/i...
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Ahhh well, just another phase in the evolution of NASA from a can do engineering organization, to a can't do political pork barrel.
What the hell are you talking about? Nobody used that phrase but you. Watch the video. He gives a reasonable answer, and then they try to steer the questioning to other topics so it doesn't get bogged down.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
The "NASA moderator quickly shut things down?"
Watch the video. Who gives a fuck?
By shutting it down during questions about security, it could mean they don't have any more prepared answers and don't want to talk about it. That's not what the press event was for. csoonline's headline is making it sound like the questioner was asking Dangerous Questions About Black-Op Shit We're Not Supposed To Talk About.
Nah, it is just because quantum computing is relativistic therefore, nothing they may say will always be true, it always depends of the user point of vue... ;-)
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/...
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
As a scientist working with quantum computing I can explain exactly why we dont talk about security and quantum computing. Last month we executed a security benchmark against it, and unfortunely the act of measuring the system security managed to accidentally change the entire quantum computer into a loaf of artisinal bread. We worked hard to change it back, by attempting to measure how inseucure the device was, but in turn only managed to collapse the waveform and ended up with a loaf of bread that was also a quantum computer. Weve not been entirely truthful with the public about this in the past but we can assure you that once we assemble what our team is tentatively referring to as a wheel of quantum swiss and a quantum superposition of 3 kinds of smoked meat, this hamiltonian evolution of delicious cold cut should get us back to a regular quantum computer. security concerns so far are centered around penetration attacks, and keith on the second floor trying to use the quantum artisinal loaf for a peanut butter and banana (regular, not quantum) sandwich.
Good people go to bed earlier.
NSA + ALEX = ANAL SEX
This doesn't really deal with the real issue, the fact that the vast majority of what D-Wave is doing is complete hype with a very tiny chance of having any practical impacts. It isn't even clear that the type of problems D-Wave's machines can handle are problems where we should expect any substantial speedup from quantum computers. D-Wave's latest attempt at claiming that their computers show noticeable speedup is less lacking than some of their previous claims, but still not at all impressive. See Scott Aaronson's blog post http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2535 where he notes that the D-Wave machine both doesn't give any apparent asymptotic speedup and is beaten by the best classical computers. The real question isn't security but why NASA is wasting money on this instead of more promising quantum computing research.
Yeah, if you actually bother to take 2 minutes to watch the video, it doesn't match the "NASA moderator shut discussion down" description at all. This is just an attempt to generate controversy where there is none.