Ask Runable forDesign-Driven General AI AgentTry Runable For Free
Runable
Back to Blog
Technology7 min read

US's big bet on quantum computing may not be entirely legal - Ars Technica

Deal also launched the first quantum foundry company, but is there a need for it? Discover insights about us's big bet on quantum computing may not be entirely

TechnologyInnovationBest PracticesGuideTutorial
US's big bet on quantum computing may not be entirely legal - Ars Technica
Listen to Article
0:00
0:00
0:00

US's big bet on quantum computing may not be entirely legal - Ars Technica

Overview

US’s big bet on quantum computing may not be entirely legal

Deal also launched the first quantum foundry company, but is there a need for it?

Details

Last week, the US government announced

2billionininvestmentsinquantumcomputingcompanies,allocating2 billion in investments in quantum computing companies, allocating
100 million each to a range of startups in exchange for equity in the companies. Those could be make-or-break investments for many companies that are likely years away from a product that could see widespread use. 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.

But the biggest chunk of money would go to a company that likely wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the government’s backing. Anderon will be set up with a billion dollars each from IBM and the government and will inherit personnel and IP from IBM. It will serve as a foundry for fabricating quantum processing units and will contract its services out to IBM and any other company that wants access to cutting-edge hardware.

Zoe Lofgren (D–Calif.), the ranking member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, made it clear that she is not happy with how the government is using its money to support this technology.

“This announcement is illegal and troubling on so many levels,” Lofgren said one day after the announcement, pointing out that the money being used for the deal comes from the CHIPS and Science Act, which was passed during the Biden administration and was allocated “specifically for microelectronics R&D, with a focus on semiconductor technology.”

That technology overlaps only partially, at best, with what’s used in quantum processors. In addition, Lofgren says the money was allocated to foster public/private research partnerships, which these deals most decidedly are not. Finally, she noted that the largest sum of money will go to IBM, and she suggested that a former IBM executive (Dario Gil, current Under Secretary for Science at the Department of Energy) was involved in the negotiations that led to this deal.

None of this, she noted, means that quantum processing technology is a bad investment or that any of these companies are unworthy of support. She just argues that doing so would require Congress to allocate the money to do so.

At this point, however, it’s not obvious how to stop the deal. A lawsuit is the obvious choice, but that would require a party with standing to sue. It’s possible that a company that might otherwise have used the money for the intended research (a public-private partnership focused on electronics) 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.

One thing that has helped IBM stay at the forefront of quantum computing is its access to in-house materials scientists and fabrication capabilities. Those resources have enabled the company to manufacture chips that test alternate designs and rapidly iterate and refine successes—an advantage powerful enough that Google also decided to open its own fabrication facility.

Given that, it’s somewhat surprising that IBM is choosing to spin these efforts into a separate company, called Anderon, which it will fund with $1 billion, alongside an equal government investment. According to the company’s announcement, it will also be handing over “significant intellectual property, assets, and a skilled workforce” to the newly launched company. The result could resemble TSMC, with the company fabricating quantum chips for firms that submit a design and pay the cost.

Not just any companies, though. IBM has specialized in producing transmons, a specific type of hardware that can host a qubit. But it’s not the only game in town. Other companies, including a number funded in the same announcement, are using technologies that host qubits in very different hardware or no hardware at all. This is very much a case of using government money to favor a specific category of technology.

That said, the move will likely be good for the broader field. A significant number of companies are designing transmon-based hardware that differs in important ways from IBM’s approach. But they’re stuck producing a limited number of test samples in fabs that may not specialize in quantum hardware, or where they have to compete with academic users for fabrication time. The launch of Anderon means those companies should now be able to access higher-quality hardware and rapidly iterate on designs. It will make testing their ideas less dependent on whether the fab they’re using produces high-quality hardware.

For IBM, this may reflect a confidence that the company has already extracted the major benefits of rapid iteration and is safely ahead of its competition. Jay Gambetta, the leader of IBM’s quantum computing efforts, has told Ars that the current hardware error rates for its chips are where they need to be to move forward with large-scale computing. Lower errors would be better, and the company has some ideas for how to achieve them, but they’re not strictly necessary for the next few years of development.

If that’s the case, why not have the government assume half the cost of staff and facilities?

We’re likely still several years away from useful error-corrected quantum computing, and closer to a decade from tackling some of the large, complicated problems where quantum computers could see widespread use. At the moment, though, it’s still unclear which technology (or technologies) will ultimately get us there first or prove capable of scaling for a decade or more. Keeping some of these companies viable for the next few years could be critical to ensuring that these technologies receive a full evaluation against those standards.

At the same time, the deal all but guarantees we’ll be investing in companies that are certain to fail. In the past, that has often devolved into cheap political point-scoring.

Longer term, it’s not entirely obvious how large Anderon’s target market will be. With a large number of startups, there will likely be a strong demand for these sorts of tips as companies test design variants and configurations. But even assuming the market settles on transmons, it’s not clear how large the annual need for these chips will be.

Transmons must be operated at milli Kelvin temperatures, and large-scale, error-corrected quantum computers will likely require chaining together chips housed in multiple refrigerated containers. That will likely mean most of the hardware in use will sit in just a few data centers and be accessed online (as it is currently). Consequently, there’s a real potential for a boom-and-bust pattern in the market for these chips.

  1.          Four Russian satellites are now within striking distance of an ICEYE radarsat
    
  2.          Whatever the mirror test tells us, beluga whales pass it
    
  3.          Space X's Starship V3—still a work in progress—mostly successful on first flight
    
  4.          Yearslong fight over users' right to tweak smart TV software heads to trial
    
  5.          The Internet can't stop watching Figure AI's humanoid robots handling packages
    

Ars Technica has been separating the signal from the noise for over 25 years. With our unique combination of technical savvy and wide-ranging interest in the technological arts and sciences, Ars is the trusted source in a sea of information. After all, you don’t need to know everything, only what’s important.

Key Takeaways

  • US’s big bet on quantum computing may not be entirely legal

  • Deal also launched the first quantum foundry company, but is there a need for it

  • Last week, the US government announced

    2billionininvestmentsinquantumcomputingcompanies,allocating2 billion in investments in quantum computing companies, allocating
    100 million each to a range of startups in exchange for equity in the companies

  • But the biggest chunk of money would go to a company that likely wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the government’s backing

Cut Costs with Runable

Cost savings are based on average monthly price per user for each app.

Which apps do you use?

Apps to replace

ChatGPTChatGPT
$20 / month
LovableLovable
$25 / month
Gamma AIGamma AI
$25 / month
HiggsFieldHiggsField
$49 / month
Leonardo AILeonardo AI
$12 / month
TOTAL$131 / month

Runable price = $9 / month

Saves $122 / month

Runable can save upto $1464 per year compared to the non-enterprise price of your apps.