cinquemb

Yeah.... best of luck to him... prepare the FTC lube... :P

Pretty much all of quantum control right now is based on the idea that qubits are these fragile things that have to be corrected, but thats because poor assumptions for quantum control are used (SO(3) precession). And even when they are treated like open quantum systems (like everything naturally is, even at 10mK and 10^-11 Torr), stuff like linblad master equations are used which is based on born-markov assumption that the env is a memoryless bath... when one stops using these poor assumptions and treat the system as a dynamical object that has natural states of stability that dont need to be actively corrected... these crypto breaking alarms are going to seem very tame.

This also has implications for alot of PQC and QKD stuff that's based on static model assumptions...

Very exciting.

Devoret was my co-authors phd advisor (and who is also my advisor now on some of my work).

We sorely need more open quantum systems built/designed with open source tooling. The IBM's, Ionq's, Quantinuum's and Googles, will be happy if we all remain serfs to their multimillion dollar machines and hardware direction.

I don't disagree with what you state, but I don't think most who are surprised now are ready to ponder systems of governance and cooperation that require less trust than those most used now so i won't go there here.

No matter what happens to any of us personally writing messages here is going to change the situation for those who have ignored the writing on the wall for so long.

People will have hard choices to be made, doubly so for those who have avoided making them. It's great that you seem to now be questioning things you have thought unquestionable; things unfolding now are no surprise to me, and i expect things to get worse, even beyond the current administration or the next until I see people make hard decisions globally.

When i see those people start to take actions that they have refused to do so for decades despite the warning signs along the road, I will take those motivations seriously.

Right now, its just a clown show in regards to that.

That may be true, and Europeans will be free to trust the Russians and the Turkish as the those in SEA are free to trust the Chinese instead.

If the rest of the world doesn't send munitions on target stateside, Americans wont care. Just like they didn't care for the past 20+ years when DoD was tasked with bombing millions others in far away lands without explicit declaration by congress.

Perhaps those who build their relationships on negotiated reciprocity rather than blind trust will fair better in the coming era.

The realpolitik of the situation: you can only really have an alliance among equals and its foolish to believe otherwise with a massive power imbalance (I doubt the cultural boundaries in Europe will aid this endeavor for some kind of unified security umbrella, when unification of the sovereign euro debt markets has remained illusive as represented by the spreads). It's clear that the post wwii era where the US willingly funds everything under the sun ex-stateside without clear equivalent concessions that can be sold politically to the stateside is over for now.

I'm hopeful that it will create a more robust governance systems on the local level in the long run, but not without more short term pain (after all, there were a lot of non-stateside mouths being fed who will have to figure out realistic alternatives and face once unpalatable choices that will need to be made out of necessity).

Don't forget the repeal of the chevron deference too by the supreme court. Agencies have a lot less power now (at least from a judicial perspective). Big trouble indeed, but its clear that for certain actors, they are experiencing pain they haven't felt before under any administration...