US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal

(arstechnica.com)

53 points | by Bender 2 days ago

16 comments

  • stymaar 3 minutes ago
    For the past year and a half, the US administration have plunged the country in a rule of law twilight zone: the rule of law still exists, and there are still independent jurisdictions to enforce it, but the administration decided they didn't care, and they just overcome any court dismissal of their orders with a new illegal order that courts will have to push back a few month later.

    Which means that, in practice, the US isn't governed by the rule of law anymore, but by the whim of the Czar's court.

  • upofadown 1 hour ago
    >That technology overlaps only partially, at best, with what’s used in quantum processors.

    Dunno, how can you say that for sure when we don't actually know how to make a practical quantum processor? The bigger issue is that we are scaling up manufacturing of approaches that have not been made to work.

    I remember a meeting where the project manager pointed out that we were due to send some test boards to a customer. I pointed out that we didn't have a design yet. The PM then asked why we couldn't send them some boards anyway. I suggested that since the boards wouldn't work that we could just cut out some green cardboard and add some component shapes with a magic marker thus saving significant time and effort.

    It turned out that I was not as funny as I thought I was...

    • prerok 45 minutes ago
      Hahaha, hilarious. I could also tell a story or two like that.

      I have to say, though, I have no idea what the management is thinking when they hire such clueless PMs. Even worse, I have seen clueless product owners who had no idea about the domain we were in. I guess a recent example could be Ive designing the Luce.

      Maybe I am just envious. Maybe I just wish I could BS my way through life like these characters do.

    • sieabahlpark 55 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • 6DM 1 hour ago
    > "could argue that it has been harmed by the diversion of the funds to a different field. But that argument would likely take so long to sort out in court that all the money would have been spent by then."

    So if I steal from someone and spend it fast enough, I wouldn't be responsible anymore and can get away with it? That's how that sounded to me.

    • dmbche 44 minutes ago
      Something about it being the banks problem if I owe them a billion
    • mrhottakes 1 hour ago
      Yes, that is basically how the justice system works. If you have enough money and lawyers you can avoid practically any consequences.
    • ben_w 27 minutes ago
      If I understand legal terminology correctly*, this is what a "preliminary injunction" is for.

      * eh. I'm not a lawyer.

      • lazide 6 minutes ago
        The principle of ‘Standing’, however, means that you also cannot sue unless you can show actual harm to yourself.

        Yes, these contradict each other somewhat.

  • kennywinker 1 hour ago
    I don’t know enough about the state of quantum computing but this sounds like IBM dumping dead end research onto taxpayers
    • petcat 1 hour ago
      Then why are they also investing $1 billion in the same company as the taxpayers?
  • Eric_Bulai 25 minutes ago
    This is a novel for a book. In a race where the rules are broken by some participants, how secure are your own systems when your opponent can access invisible technology long before the others? This should make you think.
    • lazide 6 minutes ago
      It’s literally classic prisoners dilemma?

      Hint: it doesn’t give warm fuzzies.

  • LadyCailin 10 minutes ago
    > At this point, however, it’s not obvious how to stop the deal.

    Impeachment, but congress has bent over so much that they can taste their shoes.

    • lazide 5 minutes ago
      They like the payment, and yelling about it while actually not doing anything about it means they get the benefits (as long as their constituents buy it!) while not having to do the actual hard work on take on real risk.

      When it blows up, they can even say ‘I told you so!’, often while profiting from it insider trading wise.

  • ifh-hn 1 hour ago
    My first reaction, without RTFA, is: hasn't stopped them before, why would not being legal stop US big tech now?
  • sebmellen 1 hour ago
    Quantum itself is the most scummy, grift-filled industry. Every quantum company is riding the AI/semiconductor hype wave with basically zero revenue prospects or long-term application of the tech. Companies trading at 200x earnings, IONQs CEO claiming to the “next NVIDIA”/“base case is Cisco’s market cap” — just ridiculous.
    • dlev_pika 3 minutes ago
      If you have enough money, you can say whatever bullshit and the pilot fish around you will clap.
  • mounceyboy 51 minutes ago
    my favorite conspiracy theory - the govt has already cracked all the RSA codes but they keep funding QM to show that we're still secure.
  • 123k2a 1 hour ago
    Trump Jr. is one of the government money recipients via 1789 capital (which had already profited from the groq insider sale last year):

    https://www.startribune.com/donald-trump-quantum-computing-i...

    • bix6 1 hour ago
      Trump Jr the guy selling drones to the Middle East after his father started a war? What a standup guy!
      • vjvjvjvjghv 1 hour ago
        The Trump family is a fully integrated business. Start a war, sell weapons. Negotiating peace deals and looking for investors at the same time.

        Sue the government and be in charge of the agency you sue.

    • actionfromafar 1 hour ago
      That's Sir Mountain Dew Trump Jr to you.
    • Aboutplants 53 minutes ago
      But Hunter Biden’s laptop!!!

      Meanwhile, Jr and company are grifting billions of tax dollars

  • fred_is_fred 1 hour ago
    Does it matter? The law is not a roadblock for the current administration.
    • goatlover 1 hour ago
      Until a court rules against the administration and they decide it's not worth appealing all the way to SCOTUS.
      • jm4 1 hour ago
        Neither the law nor court ruling mean anything to this administration unless it’s either in their favor or someone is able to enforce it when it’s not. They have demonstrated repeatedly that they will do whatever they want.
      • stldev 1 hour ago
        Assuming a rational decision from this regime is an absurd and amusing thought to ponder.
      • mrhottakes 1 hour ago
        ...and then they do it anyway.
      • warkdarrior 1 hour ago
        The Trump regime will just declare this tech to be a national security need.
  • josefritzishere 1 hour ago
    I think we're all seeing a theme.
    • thegrim33 1 hour ago
      Is the theme that any direction US tech advances in results in a persistent campaign of negative hit pieces aimed at trying to halt/destroy any achievements? Written by "journalists"/publishers that have never, and will never, say a single negative thing about china? Sure seems like that's the theme.
      • orsorna 1 hour ago
        What does your tangent about feelings have to do with the fact that the money is illegally allocated? That is the theme OC is pointing out.
        • itake 1 hour ago
          My understanding for the money to be "illegally allocated", the court system would have to declare it so.

          The article do not mention any lawsuits that overturn the allocation, just a couple senators disagreeing with the interpretation of the law. The senate does not interpret the law, but the judicial branch.

      • bix6 1 hour ago
        > But a member of the US Congress is now arguing that those deals are illegal, as Congress did not allocate the money for this purpose—instead, it was meant to support public research in semiconductors.

        That is the theme. Illegal use of public money. It’s called crony capitalism.

      • Hikikomori 9 minutes ago
        Plenty of that on Ars Technica, even by the same author. Baseless silly whataboutism as usual.
      • anon291 1 hour ago
        That is basically the theme. You've figured out the actual grift. The crazy thing is how these same magazines will promote actual fake industries like crypto, while demonizing industries that produce actual results like AI. The goal seems to be to get Americans to invest assets into currencies likely already controlled by foreign entities while discouraging them from developing their own potentially revolutionary technology.
        • bix6 1 hour ago
          Um sorry have you heard about the gutting of the NSF?
          • anon291 59 minutes ago
            Yeah that sucks balls but America's private capital markets are still robust.
      • mrhottakes 1 hour ago
        Take a deep breath and get your meds updated.
    • NietTim 10 minutes ago
      Can you actually make an argument instead of just vague posting?
      • dlev_pika 0 minutes ago
        waves at most executive decisions of this administration
  • shevy-java 1 hour ago
    A suspicious amount of betting here - from the top of the current administration, down to semi-regular people like that US soldier who profited from his special knowledge recently:

    https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-soldier-charged-using-clas...

    400.000$

    So if these are all the Trump-voters then I am no longer surprised. It's an ongoing cash grab on different levels - the big guns play on top.

  • CoderAshton 38 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • bebeal 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • itake 1 hour ago
    disclosure: I have large (to me) investments in quantum.

    ---

    The US needs to keep leading innovations. We have permanently lost the ability to manufacture. For China (and the world) to stay dependent on us, we need to continue pumping out technologies.

    Ukraine / Iran / Afghanistan / Vietnam has proved having the biggest baddest military is not that valuable.