Tangible impact of quantum computing

Quantum information processing and quantum technologies are in the spotlight. Quantum computing specifically, thanks to the reports of the Quantum Supremacy result. The field got a 2025 Nobel Prize and rightly so.

The ongoing process will measurably transform technology, funding, to some degree even certain areas of policy in very nuanced ways.

Some of my early works were actually in quantum information (cryptography/protocol; first research paper). I’m fortunate to understand how it works I can keep an informed eye on the area.
No difficult concepts are covered today (no equations in use!).

What’s QC

Quantum computing is a computation paradigm that is using the laws of physics (quantum mechanics) to perform computation. Specifically the paradigm benefits form the ability of constructing superpositions of qubits (quantum analogs of bits; contrary to the way it is sometimes communicated, qubits are not “1s and 0s at the same time”), and the linearity of quantum mechanics which allows performing operations on quantum superpositions. Operations benefit from quantum interference, which facilitates augmentation of superpositions in useful ways.
The take-away is that in comparison to classical (non-quantum, i.e. those you use to read this note) computers quantum computation can be much faster for certain problems. There are plenty of interesting problems that would benefit from speedup, for example, simulations (useful in finding new drugs), solving systems of equations, optimization, fast search in a database, potentially breaking some of today's encryption is not necessarily among the most exciting uses.

Quantum Supremacy and the Nobel reinforcement

Among the hottest news is not only the 2025 Nobel prize. Reports of achieving Quantum Supremacy (with the group head John Martinis awarded with the Nobel prize! and then the future results via different demonstrations) - the demonstration of a problem that benefits from a quantum computing speedup are abound. It was very fast (minutes...) to compute something on a quantum computer, but with today's technology, it would take millennia. But it’s important to realize that this result is reportedly done on a special version of quantum computers. It was a 53-qubit NISQ (noisy intermediate-scale quantum computing mentioned here, also good links about quantum supremacy result. The 53-qubit device reportedly exhibits low overall error rate (overall system efficiency ~0.2%, which looks bad but is good considering the number of used components, each one error-prone) and did use of quantum circuits. It pretty much sounds like a quantum computer.

But while important and potentially useful (for example in simulation and optimization to solve real problems), this kind of device will not result in unexciting results like, say upending global order, immediately breaking the used encryption, and most of the other headline-grabbing content you may be aware of.

Back-the-envelope foresight

While a very important result, the impact of NISQ (and let’s say quantum computers in general) in the foreseeable future may as well result in

• minimum impact on global security, international relations, etc.
• minimum impact on code-breaking, so technical security and the ability to maintain secret communication
• tangible impacts on competition and security (due to rapid development of the building blocks that maybe can be used in other areas, with commercial potential, including in defense)
• a rather minimum real impact on policy (but perceived as outright too big), social order, etc perhaps with at least two notable exceptions

The most important exception is probably the policy of funding, but which will have actual implications. We can expect funding committees focusing on quantum technologies. We can imagine policymakers (as well as VCs and business funders) giving billions to the field more comfortably. This is already happening and will be on the rise. What will be the key here is to have the right human resources force that can see the big picture and understand technology, at the same time has a good grasp in understanding quantum information science. Essentially a reinforced question of “find policymakers with competences in technology and cybersecurity”, but now with the added quantum ingredient. That’s another story.

The public may have a bit exaggerated expectation of fast progress. But unlike IT (aspects of engineering are strong) quantum computing is different (requires low-level R&D and science advancement). Progress in this domain happens remarkably fast (i.e. 1, 2), but in its own proportions.

This also means that those focusing on the rather less exciting issues, like say the impact on global order can sit relax. In the meantime, make no mistake, the area of quantum science will be a field of fierce competition, with good funding.

Can a scalable, programmable, general-purpose, noise-resilient quantum computer be realized within our lifetime? It is difficult to foresee what the next decades bring. While “between 5 and 500 years” is a very rough estimation, I wouldn’t complain if we have the quantum computing tech to do useful work as soon as in 2050.