8 thoughts on “Job Openings

  1. Hi Geordie,
    even if it is the first time I submit a comment here, I am watching the progress of your work since about the mid of last year.
    I was intrigued with quantum computing, even if not being a professional, due to the incredible amount of computing power that it is expected to yield and to the fact that it will ( eventually ) make possible to crack some NP-complete problems that are intractable by current systems.
    I also sent you a mail about that, about two-three weeks ago.
    Just few questions, anyway..

    1) I have recently ( well, about one month ago ), read about an article about a professor from Utah, who made a major breakthtough in quantum computer, that the current development of the quantum computer, if compared with the history of traditional computing is ” just before the discovery of the abacus “, hinting at the fact that he thought we are at a very eraly stage of development in the field; but now you come out saying that a prorotype is ready and DWave may go into full production soon. Is that possible that people working in the field do not know about the current status of research at Dwave at all?

    2) If the quantum computing is eventually bound to change and trasform the computing business landscape completely, how come that companies with deep pockets like Intel and IBM are not planning any version of quantum computer any time soon, but they sill focus only on traditional computing? If your work is worthwhile, why a company such intel, which can throw US$4 billion into a fab, can not spend a hundreth of this money to finance DWave?

    Sorry for the inquisitive tone of the above questions, I am just just amazed at the work you are doing.

    If you ever need somebody to work for you in Tokyo, I could do that for free!!

    Matteo Martini

  2. At the Canadian Undergraduate Technology Conference in early January, I asked a high-up guy at Intel about what plans they have for quantum computing, and he seemed to indicate that they have scattered bits of stuff going on, but that their stuff wasn’t really taking any sort of form any time soon. Well, the more significant impression I got was that they’re trying to downplay the fact that they’ve reached at least one of the limits of semiconductor circuitry (e.g. clock speed) by going in different directions on semiconductor circuitry (e.g. parallelism).

    The problem with a company like Intel putting lots of money into quantum computing before now is three little words known in business as “barrier to entry”. They are currently one of the biggest or the biggest semiconductor circuitry company in the world, so they’ve got no problem continuing with making semiconductor circuitry technology. Moving into any relatively-new, relatively-high-risk field in which they’re years behind, like quantum computers, would be a whole lot more painful for them than waiting for a company specializing in quantum computers to get it done and then partnering / buying / merging / copying. Then there’s no risk on their part, and they can still have a high chance of some end benefit, without having to venture into something on which they aren’t sure and with which they have little experience. It makes sense for them as a business. Plus, Intel probably won’t put a lot into quantum computing until they have a need to, which might not be soon, considering they’re mostly consumer-oriented at the moment, but you never know.

    Also keep in mind that what D-Wave has done is very very hard. Although there are lots of little groups around the world working on quantum computing, D-Wave was fortunate to be one of the first out of the gate (sorry, bad pun if you’ve read the QC posts) on abandoning previous approaches. That’s far from the only difficult area involved too, so it really needs a multi-disciplinary approach with experts in each discipline, which is hard to get with a small research lab, and big companies might not be willing to redistribute their experts to something that’s not their central focus.

    I won’t comment on the quotation of the prof from Utah, because Geordie probably has a nice response to it, even though he’s probably insanely busy these days leading up to the demo.

    Best of luck with the demo everyone! I can’t wait to see the video of it!

  3. Mmmm.

    Thanks for your post, Neil, but quite hard to believe, in my very humble opinion.

    1) Intel know that they are reaching the limit of transistor shrinking, now they have almost mastered the 45nm process ( due out in Q1 2008, due to the last news ), they will master the 32nm process in 2009, according to what Gargini said, and the 22nm ( P1270 ) is scheduled for 2011, unless they fail spectacularly, as the failed predicting a 5-7 GHz Pentium 4 few years ago.
    It is pretty strange that a behemot like Intel is now aware that there is a branch new market coming out soon, that can ( partially ) kick them out of the 300 billion USD semiconductor market;

    2) D-Wave started business in 1999, if I recall correctly, or soon after. If a completely nobody like me has started reading about D-Wave more than a year, why the big boys of Intel and IBM are not dropping a word about this up-coming revolution?

    3) According to what is written in the D-Wave web-site, they already have more than 100 patents pending, also Intel could have an hard time copying them, if the Orion processo will be successful..

    4) I do not agree that it does not make sense for Intel and IBM throw money into quantum computing, they can spend 1 billion in a failed architecture like Itanium, and still be leader of the market, what are the USD45 million that D-Wave has collected so far?
    Peanuts?

    Please, do not take me wrong, I am a 100% fan of what D-Wave is doing, it just seems to good to be true..

    That is all

  4. Pingback: GeekSpeak

  5. The big companies just have to wait for a smaller, more entrepreneurial company or lab to make this work and then go in and buy the technology once it has been proven at a smaller scale. The small company takes the risk, a risky approach that is not often part of the big company culture.

    It doesn’t look like there is a lack of interest in this technology by the activity in the field.

  6. If you do what you did and what you did is still working, no need to do what you don’t know. All the great innovations come from those who haven’t found a success model that distracts them from true invention. Microsoft didn’t make Google. Google didn’t make Wikipedia. Radio didn’t make TV. TV didn’t make video blogs.

  7. Would u be interested in a completely new number and logic system, similar to the difference between Roman Numerals and Arabic Numerals but along the lines of Boolean Algebra, that would be suitable for building very large Quantum Systems with error correction?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s