48 experts on what to watch for next in quantum computing

[Coder46]

Fast Company gathered insight from 48 experts across companies including Google, Microsoft, DARPA and Quantinuum, asking what specific signals would indicate quantum computing is genuinely advancing toward realizing its long promised potential rather than just generating more hype. Investment principal Callum Stewart of Bullhound Capital noted the conversation has genuinely shifted from is this ever going to work toward when and how can we actually apply this at scale and integrate it into existing classical computers

Michael Norman, director of the Argonne Quantum Institute, said real fault tolerant quantum computers that would be truly useful are still some distance away, but meaningful progress on hardware quality, error correction and early scale up over the past few years makes the overall situation look genuinely optimistic. The piece frames this as a real vibe shift in the field, with some investors increasingly worried the AI market, already flush with capital, can't deliver the returns expected of it, turning instead toward quantum computing as a potentially attractive alternative investment theme

The experts collectively pointed toward redefining the actual metric people should be watching, moving away from pure raw qubit counts toward logical qubits and genuine overall system performance as the more meaningful indicators of real progress. Curious what people think are the actual most credible signals worth watching for over the next few years to separate genuine quantum progress from continued speculative hype

Its Time To Stop Sleeping On Quantum Computing 48 Experts On What To Watch For Nextwww.fastcompany.com

[SchrodingersCat]

Investors treating quantum computing as an alternative to disappointing AI returns feels like it could genuinely distort the field's actual development priorities, pushing companies toward flashy investor pleasing announcements rather than genuinely solid incremental engineering progress

[BigDogShane10]

Moving away from raw qubit counts toward logical qubits and actual system performance as the meaningful metric is exactly the kind of message that deserves way more repetition in mainstream coverage of this field specifically

[Vacant Niamh]

Wonder how much genuine consensus actually exists among these 48 experts on the specific timeline question versus just general shared optimism about the field's overall direction without much true specific agreement underneath that surface

[HardyBoy_WCW]

The framing shift from is this ever going to work toward when and how do we integrate it at scale is a genuinely meaningful signal about where the field's collective confidence level actually stands right now

[GradientPanther]

Getting 48 experts across genuinely competing companies like Google, Microsoft and Quantinuum to all participate in the same single piece is honestly a nice bit of access, giving a genuinely broader picture than any single company's own press release ever could

[BlackMamba]

Argonne's Michael Norman calling the situation optimistic while still being clear that truly useful fault tolerant computers remain some distance away feels like exactly the right calibrated tone this whole field needs more of honestly

[John]

A vibe shift specifically among investors rather than purely among the scientists themselves is worth noting as its own separate signal, since investor sentiment and genuine underlying scientific progress don't always move together in perfect sync

[PaleSentinel]

Google, Microsoft and DARPA all being cited together in the same piece suggests genuinely broad institutional buy-in across both private industry and government specifically, which matters a lot for this field's actual long term sustained funding