<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: vtomole</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=vtomole</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 10:11:05 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=vtomole" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You're right. I didn't sufficiently separate experimental physics QC from engineering QC.<p>On the engineering end, the question on if a large-scale quantum computer can be built is leaning to be "yes" so far. DARPA QBI <a href="https://www.darpa.mil/research/programs/quantum-benchmarking-initiative" rel="nofollow">https://www.darpa.mil/research/programs/quantum-benchmarking...</a> was made to answer this question and 11 teams have made it to Stage B. Of course, only people who believe DARPA will trust this evidence, but that's all I have to go on.<p>On the application front, the jury is still out for applications that are not related to simulation or cryptography: <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.09124" rel="nofollow">https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.09124</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2025 05:08:12 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408629</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408629</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408629</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Quantum theory predicts this: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_theorem" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_theorem</a>. An experiment can show that this prediction is false. This is a scientific problem not an engineering one. Physical theories have to be verified with experiments. If the results of the experiment don't match what the theory predicts then you have to do things like re-examine data, revise the theory e.t.c.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 27 Dec 2025 17:26:51 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46403396</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46403396</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46403396</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Good point. I didn't sufficiently delineate what counts as a scientific problem and what counts as an engineering problem in QC.<p>Quantum theory, like all physical theories, makes predictions. In this case, quantum theory predicts that if the physical error rate of qubits is below a threshold, then error correction can be used to increase the quality of a logical at arbitrarily high levels. This prediction can be false. We currently don't know all of the potential noise sources that will prevent us from building a quantum logic gate that is of similar quality as a classical logic gate.<p>Building thousands of these logical qubits is an engineering problem similar to Dyson spheres and space elevators. You're right that the lower levels of building 1 really good logical qubit doesn't mean that we can build thousands of them.<p>If our case, even the lower-levels haven't been validated. This is what I meant when I implied that the project of building a large-scale QC might teach us something new about physics.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 27 Dec 2025 17:12:05 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46403258</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46403258</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46403258</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Sure, I'm not disagreeing that this processor is noisy, just providing enough context to say that it's fine. Historically, these devices improve enough to be under threshold at which point it doesn't matter that they are noisy cause error correction protocols can be run on top of them.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 20:21:54 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395801</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395801</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395801</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This processor is state-of-the-art for silicon quantum computing. It's where modalities like superconducting were 15 years ago, and superconducting does not create noise these days <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08449-y" rel="nofollow">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08449-y</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 19:23:32 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395274</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395274</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395274</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09848-5" rel="nofollow">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09848-5</a> performs CZ gates on up to 256 qubits with fidelities of 99.5%, which is good enough to run surface codes below threshold.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 19:03:18 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395102</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395102</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395102</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Quantum theory is so unlikely to be wrong that if large-scale fault tolerant quantum computers could not be built, the effort to try to build them will not be a dead end, but instead a revolution in physics.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 18:42:17 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46394868</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46394868</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46394868</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Quantum theory says that quantum computers are physically plausible. Quantum theory lies in the realm of physics, not mathematics. As a physical theory, it makes predictions about what is plausible in the real world. One of those predictions is that it's possible to build a large-scale fault tolerant quantum computer.<p>The way to test out this theory is to try out an experiment to see if this is so. If this experiment fails, we'll have to figure out why theory predicted it but the experiment didn't deliver.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 17:44:42 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46394293</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46394293</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46394293</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Depends on what we mean by "early days on hardware".<p>If we mean "we've have been working on this for almost 3 decades. That's a very long time to be working on something!". I agree.<p>If we mean "We just now only have a few logical qubits that outperform their physical counterparts and we'll need thousands of these logical qubits to run anything useful" then we are still in the early days.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 16:57:52 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393832</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393832</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393832</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>"early days" means that the 1998 computer didn't have qubits that were below the error correction threshold. Now we have hundreds of qubits below threshold. We'll need millions of qubits like these for quantum computing to be useful. If that take decades, this is the "early days" relatively.<p>It's not only early days in hardware, it's early days in practical applications as well: <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.09124" rel="nofollow">https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.09124</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 16:05:22 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393344</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393344</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393344</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> Is there a guarantee that these things can and will work given enough time?<p>Quantum theory predicts that they will work given enough time. If they don't work, there is something about physics that we are missing.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 15:31:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393029</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393029</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46393029</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The graphs aren't telling you that QC hardware is not improving at a super-exponential pace?<p>There are no real world use cases today. The hardware is not advanced enough yet, but it's improving exponentially.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 15:20:24 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392909</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392909</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392909</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Oops, updated. Thanks!</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 15:14:04 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392823</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392823</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392823</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>QC progress happens super-exponentially: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46383233">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46383233</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 14:34:35 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392322</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392322</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392322</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Silicon is not one of the leading modalities for quantum computers, but it has progressed a lot in the past ~2-3 years. Here are a few key advancements that have happened as of late:<p>- Intel can now do 2D which means a Surface code can be run on these devices: <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.14918" rel="nofollow">https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.14918</a><p>- HRL can now do 2D as well: <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.08861" rel="nofollow">https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.08861</a><p>- They are solving the wiring problem: <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41565-023-01491-3" rel="nofollow">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41565-023-01491-3</a><p>- Their interconnects are high fidelity: <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09827-w" rel="nofollow">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09827-w</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 14:33:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392307</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392307</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392307</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "An 11-qubit atom processor in silicon with all fidelities from 99.10% to 99.99%"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>No, and Shor's is not a good benchmark for these early quantum computers: <a href="https://algassert.com/post/2500" rel="nofollow">https://algassert.com/post/2500</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 14:26:07 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392243</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392243</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46392243</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "Ask HN: What did you read in 2025?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Which version did you read? I read this one: <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Penguin-Classics-Hardcover-Aurelius/dp/0141395869" rel="nofollow">https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Penguin-Classics-Hardcove...</a>, which provides a lot of context. Here are my thoughts on it: <a href="https://vtomole.com/blog/2025/12/14/aurelius" rel="nofollow">https://vtomole.com/blog/2025/12/14/aurelius</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 13:55:11 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46391995</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46391995</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46391995</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by vtomole in "Ask HN: What did you read in 2025?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Turns out, a lot of Plato this year. See <a href="https://vtomole.com/" rel="nofollow">https://vtomole.com/</a> for the list.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 13:51:47 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46391974</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46391974</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46391974</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[PsiQuantum Raises $1B, Says Its Quantum Computer Will Be Ready in 2 Years]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Article URL: <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/psiquantum-raises-1-billion-says-its-computer-will-be-ready-in-two-years-2d19fb57">https://www.wsj.com/articles/psiquantum-raises-1-billion-says-its-computer-will-be-ready-in-two-years-2d19fb57</a></p>
<p>Comments URL: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45200029">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45200029</a></p>
<p>Points: 2</p>
<p># Comments: 0</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 16:26:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://www.wsj.com/articles/psiquantum-raises-1-billion-says-its-computer-will-be-ready-in-two-years-2d19fb57</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45200029</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45200029</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[Honeywell's Quantinuum raises funds from Nvidia, others at $10B valuation]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Article URL: <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/honeywells-quantinuum-raises-funds-nvidia-others-10-billion-valuation-2025-09-04/">https://www.reuters.com/business/honeywells-quantinuum-raises-funds-nvidia-others-10-billion-valuation-2025-09-04/</a></p>
<p>Comments URL: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45127775">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45127775</a></p>
<p>Points: 2</p>
<p># Comments: 0</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2025 14:36:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://www.reuters.com/business/honeywells-quantinuum-raises-funds-nvidia-others-10-billion-valuation-2025-09-04/</link><dc:creator>vtomole</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45127775</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45127775</guid></item></channel></rss>