Will Quantum Supremacy Make the World Safer or More Vulnerable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dr Wu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Entangled Quantum
AI Thread Summary
Quantum supremacy poses significant implications for digital security, particularly regarding the obsolescence of current cryptographic algorithms like RSA and elliptic curve codes. As quantum computing advances, there is a potential for a new era of quantum cryptography that could enhance communication privacy, making personal communications safer from hacking. However, this shift could also hinder global intelligence and monitoring capabilities, raising concerns about the balance between privacy and security. The transition to quantum-safe cryptographic codes is being supported by organizations like ETSI. Additionally, there are discussions about the reliability of quantum signal transmission through various mediums, including the atmosphere and space, and the potential risks of information interception. Despite the profound societal implications of quantum advancements, mainstream media coverage remains limited, highlighting a gap in public awareness and understanding of these technologies.
Dr Wu
Messages
183
Reaction score
42
The many online articles about the future security issues posed by quantum supremacy — at least those pitched at the interested layperson (like myself) — tend for quite understandable reasons to focus on the outcomes that QS will have on today’s digital-based security systems. . . not as they might manifest in the slightly more distant future.

So assuming in such a futuristic context that quantum supremacy is now globally supreme, does this mean then that the world at large, that’s to say everyone from corporate CEOs to your local candlestick maker, will be safe from online hackers? In other words, will full-on quantum cryptography spell the end, not only of cryptanalysis as a profession, but also doom the entire global intelligence-gathering/cyber-monitoring defence industry, with government agencies like the NSA and GCHQ consigned to the dustbin of history?

If so, this at first glance could be both a Golden Age and a Dark One; golden in that all personal communications will be safe from all such online attacks; dark because the means to monitor terrorists, criminals and rogue state operatives by remote means are now essentially scuppered. Another way to look at it is that QS returns/regresses the modern world back to a kind of pre-Marconi state of innocence, one that a Victorian letter writer or Pony Express rider would have recognised? Or is this being too simplistic?

One thing is for sure: it’s getting to be mighty hard to read an Earth-based, techno-driven SF story set in the nearish future that doesn’t (by whatever sleight-of-hand means) take account of the above outline. Even offworld-based SF that includes space communications isn’t entirely free of this restriction.

A personal note: as someone penning such a story, it’s getting to the point that this endlessly put-off issue has left a bad smell festering in the plotting department. The only recourse is to assume that quantum supremacy means what it says; that it’s re-established communications privacy at all levels, so learn to live with it. The bad smell still lingers, though. Hence this plea for some clarification.

Thanks for reading this post.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I prefer the phrase "Quantum Advantage". "Quantum Supremacy" is a bit too romantic for my blood - and it suggests that quantum computing will eventually replace and obsolete regular digital computing. It will not. In fact, you need digital computers to operate qubit processors.

There are two cryptographic algorithms that would become obsolete if quantum computers were able to effectively entangle hundreds of qubits into a single state. Those algorithms are RSA and elliptical curve codes.
Groups such as ETSI are assisting in attempts to transition to cryptographic codes that can be proven to be quantum safe.

There is a quantum-based method for transmitting information that is protected by statistics and the laws of Physics from being intercepted - and that is probably what you are referencing in your post.
Here is an article describing that technique.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes berkeman and Dr Wu
Thanks for your helpful comments - and the links too. Interesting reading. Your statement about the need for digital computers to operate qubit processors intrigued me somewhat.

Another thought: would a quantized signal, beamed, for example, via a laser, risk becoming corrupted by the medium through which it's being transmitted, namely the atmosphere itself? Might the same problem also occur with space communications, here space weather coming in the form of the solar wind, cosmic rays etc? I should imagine that the shielding supplied by a cabled connection would nullify this problem, assuming it's a problem in the first place, of course. Just a thought.

Yes, "quantum supremacy" does sound a tad overblown.
 
Dr Wu said:
Another thought: would a quantized signal, beamed, for example, via a laser, risk becoming corrupted by the medium through which it's being transmitted, namely the atmosphere itself? Might the same problem also occur with space communications, here space weather coming in the form of the solar wind, cosmic rays etc?
The same methods that are described in the second article for detecting internal errors could also be used to detect transmission issues. There are always transmission "risks". The transmission "risk" that is most important in these quantum systems is the risk of the information being intercepted. Entanglement can keep that risk at bay.
 
Yes, I read the article the first time, but clearly missed the connection.

More generally speaking, it's surprising that so little about QA appears to have reached the mainstream print media. There's no end of books published on the subject on black holes, for instance; a fair number too about AI, and its societal implications. Even so, the quantization of the electronic media, and the huge impact it's likely to have upon society at large, almost seems to be - to borrow Ray Kurzweil's term - a "singularity" in its own right. Apart from a scattering of technical papers on the subject, the eyes-wide-shut attitude adopted thus far by the major publishing houses is startling. Quite remarkable, in fact.

Just giving my ten cents worth.
 
I wonder how much stories were written, that involve space fighters, and arent so soft as Star wars. I dont think missiles totally make fighter craft obsolate, for example the former cant escort shuttles if one wants to capture a celestial body. I dont insist fighters have to be manned (i enjoyed Enders game about someone control the events for afar) but i also think it isnt totally unjustifiable.
So far I've been enjoying the show but I am curious to hear from those a little more knowledgeable of the Dune universe as my knowledge is only of the first Dune book, The 1984 movie, The Sy-fy channel Dune and Children of Dune mini series and the most recent two movies. How much material is it pulling from the Dune books (both the original Frank Herbert and the Brian Herbert books)? If so, what books could fill in some knowledge gaps?
I thought I had discovered a giant plot hole in Avatar universe, but apparently it's based on a faulty notion. So, the anti-gravity effect that lifts whole mountains into the sky is unrelated to the unobtanium deposits? Apparently the value of unobtanium is in its property as a room temperature superconductor, which enables their superluminal drive technology. Unobtanium is found in large deposits underground, which is why they want to mine the ground. OK. So, these mountains - which...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
38
Views
7K
Back
Top