I'll stop responding now as I was genuinely curious to hear your reasoning and see your sources but you seem unwilling to share either so it is quite hard to have open communication.

However the readout is always done by a classical computer at the moment. We aren't at the stage where we have an integrated system that can use photonic chip say from start to finish. That's not a sign it's fraudulent, that's just the stage we are at.

Secondly, there are fraudulent claims in every area of research or enhanced claims, that doesn't mean none of the science is valid.

What's your background here?

Your skepticism is valid to some extent with some implementations but your background knowledge doesn't support your theory and clearly hasn't seen the results first hand (which is understandable of course unless you work in research in that field).

I am very curious why your point of view is expressed in this manner. It feels as if you were in a field that is now recieving less funding due to QC and PC.

It feels as if you are collating all work with any mention of quantum as one which it isn't. Also it feels as if you are assuming quantum computing is exclusively focused on brute force algorithm cryptography cracking which again it isn't. Quantum computing is exclusively any form of computing that utilizes quantum theory to manipulate data. That's not automatically "better" just more effective for certain circumstances.

There are already real world examples of quantum computing methods utilising photons that can perform security jobs that classical computing simply couldn't do especially in relation to photon pairs.

Not snake oil, just engineering and physics.

I would agree that some claims are lies or misguided, however yes with the right algorithmic processes, these devices can affect current security of cryptography one day. That doesn't mean their work was worthless but like everything, things progress. It's not obsolete, it's been built on.

The industry shouldn't be fabricating claims but the industry that is honest of which there are many, do not need to protect other industries. Fabrication happens in every industry.

Tech is only obsolete if you aren't inventive of how to repurpose it.

I work in the field to some extent, although more closely on photonic computing, and would agree there is a majority of snake oil in the field. Yet that's the case with any field above a certain size that has recently become the latest buzzword. Just look at AI.

There most certainly are people with valuable contributions in the field, that will eventually change how we are able to analyse the world around us. We are a long way from that but these steps are the start to the end goal in 10's of years from now.

Whether you are considered a "scammer", greatly depends on what side of it. I do feel there are people who are scammers in the field, as well as people who aren't smart enough to realise how unrealistic their plan is, who are then funded by people even less qualified to state how unrealistic the plan is. Basically, a Theranos situation again. Again, this also applies to so many other companies including AI.

(Before anyone starts. Yes, the read out is essential, but room temperature devices are coming to the forefront now so no the cryostat is not a compulsory part of the QC setup.)

I saw a tour take place at my facility whereby a man pointed at an empty cryostat and said "Wow, a quantum computer". None of us had the heart to tell him otherwise.

This isn't made easier for those who do have family and friends. They have minimal physical connections day to day due to societal rules that are arbitrarily restrictive and based in long should have been abandoned historical expectations.

You can simply say, Canada has an issue with this. France has an issue with this.

It is the same when you often see on forums, "It is better in Japan". It isn't a relevant comment and therefore invokes comparison.