Quantum computing and bitcoin

[Lauda]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future? 

Because they are only using a small amount of qubits (latest model 1152) at the moment. These computers are only very fast in certain types of operations, and may even be slower than traditional computers in others.

Is the future now?

I'd say not yet.

“You need to read the fine print,” says Matthias Troyer of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. “This is 108 times faster than some specific classical algorithm on problems designed to be very hard for that algorithm but easy for D-Wave.” In other words, the D-Wave had a massive home advantage.

Better versions of the simulated annealing algorithm can reduce this advantage to just 100 times faster, says Troyer, while other more complex algorithms running on an ordinary PC can beat D-Wave entirely. “A claim of ’108 speedup’ is thus very misleading,” he says.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28641-experts-doubt-googles-claim-about-its-quantum-computers-speed/
You can probably finder more/better information if you spend more time researching into it.

[1715010059]

1715010059

[1715010059]

1715010059

[1715010059]

1715010059

[1715010059]

1715010059

[1715010059]

1715010059

[1715010059]

1715010059

[cjmoles]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?

Because they are only using a small amount of qubits (latest model 1152) at the moment. These computers are only very fast in certain types of operations, and may even be slower than traditional computers in others.

Is the future now?

I'd say not yet.

“You need to read the fine print,” says Matthias Troyer of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. “This is 108 times faster than some specific classical algorithm on problems designed to be very hard for that algorithm but easy for D-Wave.” In other words, the D-Wave had a massive home advantage.

Better versions of the simulated annealing algorithm can reduce this advantage to just 100 times faster, says Troyer, while other more complex algorithms running on an ordinary PC can beat D-Wave entirely. “A claim of ’108 speedup’ is thus very misleading,” he says.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28641-experts-doubt-googles-claim-about-its-quantum-computers-speed/
You can probably finder more/better information if you spend more time researching into it.

I agree.  If I spent more time looking at all the specs, I would be more aware....and I have spent some time looking into it.  But, my point was that there are already quantum computers in use and pre-orders are already filled for the next generation machines....Quantum computers are here now and the number of qubits they're achieving each year is growing at a pace that rivals Moore's Law....I don't think bitcoin needs to be overly concerned because the network will adjust.

[Hugroll]

In the future it could have an impact. If SHA encryption is broken for example. However bitcoin would be the least of our worries if that happened. Much of the internet would be vulnerable.  

agreed, the amount of resources that go into funding and operating a quantum computer is extremely extremely high. i really doubt anyone would be using such amazing processing power to brute force a bitcoin private key.

[tubehand]

In the future it could have an impact. If SHA encryption is broken for example. However bitcoin would be the least of our worries if that happened. Much of the internet would be vulnerable.  

Nexus is the only coin in development with the foresight to see the back lash QC will have on current block chain tech.

Pretry interesting check em out

EDIT: It is also true that if we saw this coming we could switch to another encryption scheme.

[franky1]

in regards to quantum computing people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
quantum/d-wave (once you wash away the foolish buzzwords of it) is simple. instead of a micro transistor having 2 options(binary).. it has 4.

and here is where the magic evaporates.
in binary
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no/negative/dark)
imagine 1 volt is 1(true/on/yes/positive/light)

now.. imagine instead of 2 options. there are four options 0 1 2 3
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no)
imagine 0.33 volts is 1(not false not true/not off not on/not no not yes)
imagine 0.66 volts is 2(false and true/off and on/ no and yes)
imagine 1 volt is 3(true/on/yes)

now imagine all this shit about trans-dimensional space, time travel and parallel states as just bait, to keep the very simple logical process from being revealed(avoid corporate competition by not revealing the simple secret sauce ingredient) of micro transistors with 4 options instead of 2

the whole "new states of both on and off" is just wishy washy wording, meant only for sci-fi movies because its not actually any magic of
binary "off / on"
dwave "off / not off not on/ off AND on / on"

as these are just attributes(names) and those 2 new options in the middle can mean anything you want it to mean.
yes / maybe / not sure / no
yes / sometimes / not often / no
night / morning / afternoon / evening

all you need to know is a micro transistor in a Dwave has 4 options instead of 2.
an 8 bit dwave 'byte' allows for 65,536 possibles(4^8) instead of 8 bit binary 'byte' allowing for 256 possibles(2^8)
this allow a hex to be stored using just two bits instead of 4bits
meaning you can store FFFF(33333333) in one dwave byte instead of just FF in a binary byte(11111111)

its utility for compression and speed improvement of data is limited. but its utility in logic problems opens up immensely.

its just going to take time for then to think up some logic problems that can utilise the 2 extra options.

if you want to think of it like a switch.
bright light on / romantic dim setting / movie-gaming dim setting / light off.
if your light switch in your living room or den only has on or off. your missing out on 'mood lighting'. get yourself a dimmer switch
and then spend some time thinking about what you will use the two new dimmer settings for, but be warned they are not for trans-dimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

[Hugroll]

people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
~~~ but be warned they are not for transdimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

lol no one said quantum computers is going to take you to different universes. this is about the processing power of the computers being greater and how someone can use that bruteforce a privatekey.

[tubehand]

The only coin Dev team with the foresight to see 10 years into the future and be prepared for quantum computing.

Just like satoshi had the insight with bitcoin.

Nxs team is no joke. All it takes is some DD to find out


http://www.nexusearth.com

https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@keithsmih/nexus-earth-nxs-the-most-secure-cryptocurrency-on-earth

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@gjsteele71/nexus-crypto-currency-simplified-a-guide-for-everyone

[franky1]

people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
~~~ but be warned they are not for transdimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

lol no one said quantum computers is going to take you to different universes. this is about the processing power of the computers being greater and how someone can use that bruteforce a privatekey.

im talking more about the comedy of the D-wave CEO doing TED talks and magazine interviews trying to sell d-wave using words fit only for a sci-fi novel

[cjmoles]

in regards to quantum computing people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
quantum/d-wave (once you wash away the foolish buzzwords of it) is simple. instead of a micro transistor having 2 options(binary).. it has 4.

and here is where the magic evaporates.
in binary
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no/negative/dark)
imagine 1 volt is 1(true/on/yes/positive/light)

now.. imagine instead of 2 options. there are four options 0 1 2 3
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no)
imagine 0.33 volts is 1(not false not true/not off not on/not no not yes)
imagine 0.66 volts is 2(false and true/off and on/ no and yes)
imagine 1 volt is 3(true/on/yes)

now imagine all this shit about trans-dimensional space, time travel and parallel states as just bait, to keep the very simple logical process from being revealed(avoid corporate competition by not revealing the simple secret sauce ingredient) of micro transistors with 4 options instead of 2

the whole "new states of both on and off" is just wishy washy wording, meant only for sci-fi movies because its not actually any magic of
binary "off / on"
dwave "off / not off not on/ off AND on / on"

as these are just attributes(names) and those 2 new options in the middle can mean anything you want it to mean.
yes / maybe / not sure / no
yes / sometimes / not often / no
night / morning / afternoon / evening

all you need to know is a micro transistor in a Dwave has 4 options instead of 2.
an 8 bit dwave 'byte' allows for 65,536 possibles(4^8) instead of 8 bit binary 'byte' allowing for 256 possibles(2^8)
this allow a hex to be stored using just two bits instead of 4bits
meaning you can store FFFF(33333333) in one dwave byte instead of just FF in a binary byte(11111111)

its utility for compression and speed improvement of data is limited. but its utility in logic problems opens up immensely.

its just going to take time for then to think up some logic problems that can utilise the 2 extra options.

if you want to think of it like a switch.
bright light on / romantic dim setting / movie-gaming dim setting / light off.
if your light switch in your living room or den only has on or off. your missing out on 'mood lighting'. get yourself a dimmer switch
and then spend some time thinking about what you will use the two new dimmer settings for, but be warned they are not for trans-dimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

I agree with everything accept the wormhole jumping and trans-dimensional universe hopping.  The way I understand it is that they are especially suited for such applications; in fact, that's the primary cause of the Mandela Effect.  <---Kidding

Tinfoil hats aside:  Considering the 4 different states, I take it that boolean logic wouldn't be effective....but once a more established "fuzzy" logic is standardized, do you think the bitcoin community has it in them to re-vamp the code in a timely and diplomatic manner?

[noormcs5]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I believe quantum computers are a problem for cryptocurrency the future, but I think it will still take a long time for this to happen. Maybe decades or even more.

[Wind_FURY]

There is already news out in reddit that the Litecoin developers headed none other than Charlie Lee will start R&D on the cryptocurrency's upgrades. Among them were confidential transactions, dynamic block sizes and a quantum resistant cryptography method. Maybe the Bitcoin core developers might learn a thing or two from the LTC developers and integrate their research and progress into Bitcoin's protocol.

[Kakmakr]

I see a lot of people here are saying that the Algorithm can be upgraded to solve the increase in the processing threat of the introduction of Quantum computers. Has any experiments been done on the Test Net, to see what the impact of such a upgrade would be?

What would be the next possible upgrade? < SHA-384, SHA-512/224 and SHA-512/256 > ? Would this not slow down the network and transactions considerably?

[ranlo]

in regards to quantum computing people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
quantum/d-wave (once you wash away the foolish buzzwords of it) is simple. instead of a micro transistor having 2 options(binary).. it has 4.

and here is where the magic evaporates.
in binary
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no/negative/dark)
imagine 1 volt is 1(true/on/yes/positive/light)

now.. imagine instead of 2 options. there are four options 0 1 2 3
imagine 0 volts is 0(false/off/no)
imagine 0.33 volts is 1(not false not true/not off not on/not no not yes)
imagine 0.66 volts is 2(false and true/off and on/ no and yes)
imagine 1 volt is 3(true/on/yes)

now imagine all this shit about trans-dimensional space, time travel and parallel states as just bait, to keep the very simple logical process from being revealed(avoid corporate competition by not revealing the simple secret sauce ingredient) of micro transistors with 4 options instead of 2

the whole "new states of both on and off" is just wishy washy wording, meant only for sci-fi movies because its not actually any magic of
binary "off / on"
dwave "off / not off not on/ off AND on / on"

as these are just attributes(names) and those 2 new options in the middle can mean anything you want it to mean.
yes / maybe / not sure / no
yes / sometimes / not often / no
night / morning / afternoon / evening

all you need to know is a micro transistor in a Dwave has 4 options instead of 2.
an 8 bit dwave 'byte' allows for 65,536 possibles(4^8) instead of 8 bit binary 'byte' allowing for 256 possibles(2^8)
this allow a hex to be stored using just two bits instead of 4bits
meaning you can store FFFF(33333333) in one dwave byte instead of just FF in a binary byte(11111111)

its utility for compression and speed improvement of data is limited. but its utility in logic problems opens up immensely.

its just going to take time for then to think up some logic problems that can utilise the 2 extra options.

if you want to think of it like a switch.
bright light on / romantic dim setting / movie-gaming dim setting / light off.
if your light switch in your living room or den only has on or off. your missing out on 'mood lighting'. get yourself a dimmer switch
and then spend some time thinking about what you will use the two new dimmer settings for, but be warned they are not for trans-dimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

First off, this is an awesome explanation (ELI5) of what's going on. I'm not knowledgeable about hardware but that was even easy enough for ME to understand it.

But something people aren't answering WRT changes in algorithm due to faster processing is... ASICs would all be rendered useless, correct? Like aren't ASICs only working with BTC solely because of the current algorithm, such that changing this would render them worthless since they can't be modified? Or is there a way to alter the system in such a way that it's still protected but the current hash power would still be usable? Essentially, I see a huge shift of mining power otherwise, where the first people with quantum ASICs would dwarf all the other hash power combined.

[springgers]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I believe quantum computers are a problem for cryptocurrency the future, but I think it will still take a long time for this to happen. Maybe decades or even more.

             

Same thought however one day it will happen, I hope the Bitcoin will be ready for this, it's a bilateral progress, we don't have to worry about that. Should we?

[Pursuer]

it has always been a battle between technology and improvement of security. this has been going on even before computers were created.

people make safes, robbers make drills to open them, safe makers improve the strength of their safe, robbers get better drills, safe makers improve their security with electronic devices, robbers disable the alarms.

we use sha256 for encryption in bitcoin quantum computers become a thing, we move on to a new and more complicated method of encryption, quantum computers 2.0 become a thing we move to encryption 2.0

and this will continue long after you and me are dead

[markj113]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I agree, and these are the ones we know about.

I am sure there are several generations ahead locked away in secret secure research labs.

[davis196]

So it just came to me. Quantum computers are pretty  in the near future and it will expand and change prety much everything we see now, but how will quantum computing impact bitcoin?

I`m not very familiar with quantum computers.

I don`t know if they will help bitcoin or destroy it.

All i know is that i want a new quantum computer to replace my old PC.

Just kidding.

[Wind_FURY]

people need to get their heads out of the sci-fi section and into reality.
~~~ but be warned they are not for transdimensional wormhole jumping or parallel universe hopping

lol no one said quantum computers is going to take you to different universes. this is about the processing power of the computers being greater and how someone can use that bruteforce a privatekey.

im talking more about the comedy of the D-wave CEO doing TED talks and magazine interviews trying to sell d-wave using words fit only for a sci-fi novel

I just found this one today.

http://www.dwavesys.com/press-releases/d-wave-systems-previews-2000-qubit-quantum-system

So that is not real then or are we missing something? Or maybe the possibility of quantum computers are closer than we thought? The company can be charged with something if they are doing some kind of false advertising for their products, right?

[yayayo]

In the future it could have an impact. If SHA encryption is broken for example. However bitcoin would be the least of our worries if that happened. Much of the internet would be vulnerable.  

Since the topic is centering around Bitcoin, whether we would have to worry about the security of the whole Internet or not is totally irrelevant to the fact that Bitcoin would suffer from SHA becoming insecure. To put it in another way: It's no relief for Bitcoin users, that the Internet is becoming vulnerable as well. So in my eyes this is a non-argument.

For me, it's crystal clear that development must have a plan B well in advance of SHA becoming insecure - regardless if the insecurity comes from quantum computing or some other kind of discovery/invention. We even can't take for granted that there will be clearly visible signs in advance, since most research targeted at breaking encryption happens in secrecy - at three-letter agencies.

Still I don't think that a security threat from Quantum Computing will practically materialize within the next 10 years.

ya.ya.yo!

[Yutikas_11920]

Why are people saying that quantum computers are still a thing of the future?  Aren't they already here and only getting better?  http://www.sciencealert.com/google-s-quantum-computer-is-100-million-times-faster-than-your-laptop  And, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems

Is the future now?

I agree, and these are the ones we know about.

I am sure there are several generations ahead locked away in secret secure research labs.

Yeah it is true, that this is something that becomes our Foundation to stay afloat in the bitcoin. Bitcoin's life will be better, when they could be doing more in-depth research on bitcoin and also use or create devices that support fully about bitcoin. So, just wait for the time to arrive and feel something extraordinary things