Another breakthrough purportedly brings us closer to quantum computing

In reality, quite a bit of time has passed since we've heard of the next great leap in the (seemingly) never-ending journey towards quantum computing, but we're incredibly relieved to learn that at least someone is still out there, somewhere, pressing on. An international team of researchers have reportedly shown that they can "control the quantum state of a single electron in a silicon transistor, even putting the electron in two places at once." Essentially, the team is using tiny semiconductor transistors to "control the state of a quantum system," but there is still a long ways to go before any of this is meaningful. The crew managed to discover a few things by chance, yet to create a quantum computer, they would need to "position atoms of arsenic (or some other material) in the transistors more reliably." For those of you way too geeked out, fret not -- we'll let you know when all of this technobabble finally amounts to something.

[Thanks, Chris]

[Travis @ Jul 20th 2008 12:04AM]

what operating system does this "quantum computing" use??? {insert windows jokes in reply}

[Alex @ Jul 20th 2008 12:14AM]

Vista is still too needy for any processor in the world. I'm guessing XP.

:P

[Kyle Kersh @ Jul 20th 2008 1:38AM]

Vista's only too needy because you're proc isn't good. I have a q6600 and it works fine .

[andres @ Jul 20th 2008 2:19AM]

@kyle
whoosh

[ethana2 @ Jul 20th 2008 3:06AM]

It will be a modified linux kernel.

[Chuckles McGee @ Jul 20th 2008 9:41AM]

The exact version can't be known, only a probability function can model what the operating system might be at a certain time.

[Link2877 @ Jul 20th 2008 12:05AM]

Anything that brings us closer is fine by me. But really when are we expected to have one up and running? like in the next thirty or forty years or something?

[David @ Jul 20th 2008 12:11AM]

i hope so.

[Brandon @ Jul 20th 2008 12:25AM]

I heard that we already have quantum computers. They're just not practical yet. It's like 8bit computer that takes several hours to setup it's 2^8 input and does 8bit calculation almost instantly. Goal would be to improve this machine to 256/512bit machine, so we'll have decryptor that can crack code in several hours (which is set up time).

[JMMGoalster @ Jul 20th 2008 12:57AM]

Quantum computers would be lethal right now. Think of all the information encrypted in databases worldwide. It would take less time to create a simple brute force program on a Quantum Computer (which could then break every encryption in seconds, or at most, minutes) than it would to create a Quantum Encryption powerful enough to prevent another Quantum Computer from breaking it. Hello mass identity theft...

[paul34 @ Jul 20th 2008 1:06PM]

JMM, quantum encryption is already available AFAIK.

[Brandon @ Jul 21st 2008 12:05AM]

Quantum cryptography is not a way to encrypt messages, but a way to share a key that encrypt/decrypt messages using conventional algorithm. So, Quantum computer cracking Quantum encryption doesn't make sense.

[Phoenix Sanders @ Jul 21st 2008 1:34AM]

They do have quantum computers up and running. I have seen one. Right now, quantum computing is where original computers first started as in they are still in the research phase and the quantum computers are just being used to run different algorithms.

[guns @ Jul 20th 2008 12:17AM]

While I do think that technology and its progress will save us all, everyone should note that every common form of digital cryptography today will be trivially crackable when quantum computing comes. Worse, it will only be owned by rich governments and corporations, and finally, quantum cryptography won't be affordable in any meaningful way for years after the qubit revolution.

So yeah. Long live the sneakernet.

[Travis @ Jul 20th 2008 12:20AM]

I think technology and it's progress will lead to our downfall, but that's just my opinion

[Wwhat @ Jul 20th 2008 10:25AM]

You think they (government organisations that don't like the light of day) don't have cracking capabilities yet? You think they don't have supercomputers and you think that if they have gotten their hands on algorithms that crack encryption they would not keep that secret? Ever since all of them suddenly stopped complaining about PGP and such being available to the public I've been wondering why they suddenly don't mind anymore.
.

[shadow @ Jul 20th 2008 11:24AM]

...or technology will destroy us all in the end.

Especially if it is only the rich who have it.

[solipsist61 @ Jul 20th 2008 12:24AM]

I thought that Canadian company, D-wave, already succeeded in making a quantum computer/processor and unveiled it last year? Was it b/s?

[Catdogburger @ Jul 20th 2008 1:17AM]

Wikipedia is your friend!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

[Chris Macdonald @ Jul 20th 2008 1:34AM]

@critic.. I think this blog is more focused on gadgets and this article was meant to tell us what this means for computers..

[Artie Lange @ Jul 20th 2008 12:33AM]

Sounds cool as long as it doesn't turn my Dell tower into a portal to another dimension; I'd hate it if multi-dimensional monsters crawled through my DVD-drive and terrorized my dog.

[hiko36 @ Jul 20th 2008 12:45AM]

Just the dog? I would be a little more worried about myself first...

[Artie Lange @ Jul 20th 2008 1:13AM]

I have an H.E.V. suit, so I'd be fine. Unfortunately, they don't make them for pooches.

[Scott @ Jul 20th 2008 2:04AM]

I hope you have a crowbar nearby, too. Just in case...

[r3loaded @ Jul 20th 2008 5:15AM]

Just keep a look-out for an odd-looking man in a suit with a briefcase, and a strange manner of talking. Don't use anything that he gives you.

[Wwhat @ Jul 20th 2008 10:27AM]

If only bush had gotten that advise.

[Ace b @ Jul 20th 2008 12:40AM]

E
P
I
C

F
A
I
L
!
!
!

[o29 @ Jul 20th 2008 12:44AM]

@ Travis:

Uh, you do realize that you're reading a blog about technology...right?

[o29 @ Jul 20th 2008 12:45AM]

Ugh, stupid reply system.

[Carl Vitullo @ Jul 20th 2008 12:59AM]

You know, i think the "geeks only" part of these two recent posts is sort of... unnecessary.

it *is* a tech blog.

[ethana2 @ Jul 20th 2008 3:07AM]

This is true.

[Spyvie @ Jul 20th 2008 4:41AM]

It used to be a tech blog, with a wealth of user generated content, but as of late...

Welcome to Web 3.0, Attack of the iTards

[AC @ Jul 20th 2008 4:54AM]

Yes i get the feeling that all of a sudden, the writers think writing for a gadget blog is anything but geeky/nerdy.... reality check needed.... this wouldn't have needed all the excuses if it were engadget a year or so ago.

[Wormbolt @ Jul 20th 2008 10:46AM]

No it isn't, It's a fashion blog that covers tech. Pay attention.

[King Mook Mook @ Jul 20th 2008 1:00AM]

Quantum Leopard hey? Have you taken your medication?

[Mr. Fax Sender @ Jul 20th 2008 1:07AM]

My god you're a genius.

[allislost @ Jul 20th 2008 1:09AM]

The day Apple announces the iDildo I'm sure your sphincter will clench with joy at the thought of owning it.

[SuperSexyErik @ Jul 20th 2008 1:09AM]

:D hehe

[DAVID @ Jul 20th 2008 1:10AM]

DOES THIS MEAN WE R GOING TO BE ABLE TO TRAVEL BACK IN TIME???

(TIMELINE-MICHAEL CRICHTON)

[Darkest Daze @ Jul 20th 2008 3:39AM]

Screw time travel, I'd be happy if it could turn off your caps-lock.

[SuperSexyErik @ Jul 20th 2008 1:11AM]

@allislost
Again, your late to the scene noob.
Idildo.com

[allislost @ Jul 20th 2008 1:17AM]

I'm not into the dildo scene... not that there's anything wrong with you owning one.

[ethana2 @ Jul 20th 2008 3:07AM]

wow.

[brianspencer-ebay @ Jul 20th 2008 5:28AM]

I think its great that they are using this technology to give us a diagram of Pubescent Breast Development! I like them pointy ones! Keep up the good work!

[Stelios Philippou @ Jul 20th 2008 8:26AM]

it will be based on Win 2000 , so it will keep on crashing and throwing atoms all over the place !

[anticlimate @ Jul 20th 2008 8:39AM]

Who is Zed?

[Samboini @ Jul 20th 2008 10:51AM]

@JMMGoalster: my mum told me the same about whore's, but she was just plain lying!

[crunkMonkey101 @ Jul 20th 2008 10:59AM]

Yeah, but does it play doom?

[roberto luongo @ Jul 20th 2008 11:34AM]

like in what the bleep? do we know.

you know, i could post the following comment on any story and it would still be relevant (and funny):

i was trying to see this on my new iphone but it wouldn't load.

we are such tools of Steve Jobbs and his stupid iphone.

and while i'm at it, i am not a microsoft fanboy. i hate microsoft fanboys. and apple fanboys. there is no rite answer to the microsoft vs apple. different ppl have different needs. If you are just doing email and word processing then you need windows. if you are doing graphic design and stuff, then you need apple. apples are wayyy overpriced for what most people use them for. and ipods work fine on windows. if you have itunes. did i mention what tools we are of steve jobbs?

[Rick @ Jul 20th 2008 1:59PM]

@roberto luongo

so you're saying that you can't do email or word processing on a mac? you've got to be joking. also, as far as the price is concerned, you get what you pay for, just like you get shit when you pay for a $400 Dell