HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

There are several misconceptions about what universal quantum computers could do. One of them is talking about exponential increase of computing power with each new qubit. It just doesn't work like that. This brief talk from Scott Aaronson tackles this issue quite well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvIbrDR1G_c

While quantum computers threaten some cryptographic schemes, it will just be the end of those schemes, not the end of cryptography in general (see: post-quantum cryptography). As long as we still have problems that are hard to compute and easy to verify, we can have cryptocurrencies. Quantum computers do not give "unlimited computing power" and do not threaten the existence of cryptocurrencies in general.

⬐ rocqua

As far as I know, there isn't a conclusive decent public-key algorithm that is quantum resistent.

We know that Diffie Helmann, RSA and their elliptic counterparts are broken in quantum. That was essentially all we had. I know that 'lattice based cryptography' is a potential option, and believe there are more potential options. However, as far as I know it is not even clear whether these are safe against classical computers.

I should note that I don't know much more about 'lattice based crypto' than the name and the hope it is quantum resistent.

⬐ quickthrower2

This is exciting. Eventually well all have a quantum computer in our pocket (or body?). The exciting thing is what possibilities does that bring? I guess we don't know yet.

⬐ None

None

⬐ beebmam

I think he was fine at communicating and not terrible to listen to. I just didn't find the talk that interesting or cover anything I didn't already know about quantum computing theory. I wish it did, because there's much I don't understand.

⬐ didymospl

Don't you expect a bit too much from 15-minute-long TED talk? Actually I think it was more informative(and definitely clearer) than a lecture on that subject I had at the university.

⬐ torbjorn

He has an excellent book, Quantum Computing Since Democritus. That's a good resource.

⬐ ladzoppelin

Wow, nice video.

⬐ None

None

⬐ baxuz

Couldn't get to the end. The guy is horribly annoying to listen to.

⬐ AlexCoventry

What's annoying about him? I didn't notice anything annoying.

⬐ mathgenius

I find it is the same with his writing. It just goes on and on. His more technical papers are better, but his blog is just a pain. I guess it takes more work to be brief. (At least for some.)

⬐ torbjorn

Personally, I find his writing style very enjoyable and often hilarious.

⬐ tmccrmck

He's also one of the preeminent minds in quantum computing. When Scott speaks he's worth listening to regardless of his mannerisms.

⬐ mcguire

Scott Aaronson is brilliant, he knows his shit, and he's very, very good at explaining it.

But, and I say this as someone who hates listening to my own speech, listening to him is nigh painful.

Is there a text version of this talk around?

⬐ ZenoArrow

Just watch it with subtitles and the sound off if it bothers you that much (I personally enjoyed the presentation).

⬐ smhost

I like to watch informative videos with subtitles at 2x speed because the subtitles make it easy to follow and the increased speed smooths out the verbal tics and idiosyncrasies (less distracting).