SPEAKER_00 0:00

Hey, my name is Eva, and this is Blond and Quantum, the podcast that breaks down quantum technology into real-world business impact. Here we make the complex simple. No equation, no overthinking, just insight, innovation, and a bit of humor. So don't worry, you don't need a PhD in physics to follow. In each episode, I talk to funders, scientists, and investors about how quantum is reshaping the industries today, not in some distant future. Oh, and if you hear a black cat boring in the background, that's my co-fox, very alive, shorting cat joining the conversation. Her name is Mel. Let's get started. Hello everyone, welcome in the next episode of London Quantum. Today, with me, I have a pleasure, big pleasure, to host Dr. Jakov Winstein, uh Chief Scientist Officer of Quantum Technologies for Mitre Corporation. Hello.

SPEAKER_01 1:04

Hello, great to see you. Thank you so much for having me on.

SPEAKER_00 1:06

Thank you so much for accepting my invitation, Jakov. It's a really, really big pleasure to have you here today. So let's maybe start from Mitre Corporation. Can you please tell us a little bit more? Because what I learned is actually very interesting. Mitre is big. It's a non-profit organization.

SPEAKER_01 1:22

Mitre is a not-for-profit organization, corporation.

SPEAKER_00 1:24

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:25

And what we do is we run FFRDCs for the federal government. So there's no test on this, but an FFRDC is a federal funded research and development center. And you kind of look at it like as a little company that works only for the federal government. So for example, Aerospace is an FFRDC, Lincoln Labs and FRRDC, most of the Department of Energy labs are FFRDCs. And FFRDCs are run by other corporations. So Patel, for example, runs a lot of the Department of Energy FFRDCs. MITRE runs FFRDCs for Department of Defense and the intelligence community, for Department of Homeland Security, for the FAA, for a number of different federal agencies. And so we support all of those different agencies.

SPEAKER_00 2:06

And there's no commercial work, from my understanding.

SPEAKER_01 2:09

We are not for profit. So we do have we do have IP. Our goal when we do generate IP is to try to get it out there, you know, as fast as we can to companies who are going to turn that IP into something real that will help the public.

SPEAKER_00 2:19

Fantastic. And you said it's a little, but I think it's worth to mention that it's not that little. It's 7,000 people. And in the biggest point, I think the highest level was like 9,000 people.

SPEAKER_01 2:30

It was. It was. So we we did have some recent layoffs, but we do have we do have about 7,000 people and we are, you know, we are hiring. And we do uh you know a whole range of technology uh areas for the for the federal government. So I say our concentration is really very much more on the computer science, AI, data analytics, a lot of work in electrical engineering. But we have, you know, we have all the good things. All wonderful things.

SPEAKER_00 2:54

And also notice that you have a very significant budget. Uh I find the data, the last data uh which are public, after the 2000 2023, and they are over 2 billion.37, almost 2.4 billion dollars. So that's more than some of European country national strategy budget.

SPEAKER_01 3:14

It is. It's it's it's it's a big, it's a it's a big corporation, but it's a very highly connected corporation. And one of the great advantages that we have at MITRE is the ability to speak to all sorts of people. So even though I'm doing quantum technologies, I can speak to the people who are really building things, electrical engineers, antenna engineers, people who are planning missions for the governments, so that we can really get a holistic view of what's necessary for the government in terms of solutions based on quantum technologies and for the public.

SPEAKER_00 3:42

That's fantastic. Okay, so let's talk a little bit more about your day-to-day work so the audience can also understand. Is it like you are running on that level because you spent significant time, if not your whole career, right? As a chief scientist. I would have never imagined, but yeah, yeah, quantum technology and matter. So how is your day-to-day work looks like? Are you running experiments? Are you publishing reports about national threat? Are you talking to policymakers, or maybe all of them?

SPEAKER_01 4:12

So it's it's definitely all of the above. Let me let me first say that I have a wonderful team. I have amazing people who work for me. And I I wouldn't say just for me. They work for the federal government, of course, and they are, you know, together. We have a really amazing group.

SPEAKER_00 4:25

And may I ask you how big is your team?

SPEAKER_01 4:27

Yeah, so it's about, you know, depending on the day, I'd say somewhere between 20 and 25 people whose full-time job is quantum.

SPEAKER_00 4:33

Nice.

SPEAKER_01 4:34

Uh and but but in terms of my day, my day-to-day, it's all it's all of the above. Um, okay, they don't let me into the labs anymore, so I don't touch any equipment. But be but beyond that, it's everything from understanding what's going on in industry, understanding what's going on in academia, reading the basic, you know, papers published in peer-reviewed journals like everybody else around the archive, sometimes do sometimes doing research, sometimes educating, a lot of educating. We want to make sure that our sponsors, which are the government agencies that we deal with, are up to speed on what's going on. They don't, we don't want to think that's magic or anything like that. So it's really, it's it's it's really a whole gamut, and any one day, you know, I can walk in saying, okay, today I'm gonna do X, Y, and Z. And then I walk in and I'm like, I need to do X or Y or Z. So I guess it's okay. And we'll go on to tomorrow.

SPEAKER_00 5:18

No, it's like it's like a big organization but operating as a small startup inside of it.

SPEAKER_01 5:23

It's wonderful. It's wonderful.

SPEAKER_00 5:25

Super cool. And uh, I wanted to ask you, because you are one of the very rare persons who is in quantum technology since the 90s.

SPEAKER_01 5:32

That's true. That is true.

SPEAKER_00 5:34

So cool and so rare as well. So I wanted to ask you about your view and the change across the decades, right? Because not only quantum research looks different in the 90s, everything looks different in the 90s. So are there anything that you imagine that time in the 90s about quantum? Or they happen or is completely different? How how you can you know tell us a little bit more about it?

SPEAKER_01 5:57

If you don't mind, I'll s I'll start at the beginning, Eva. When I, you know, I graduated from university, which is a small Jewish university here in New York City, and I applied to a number of different universities, kind of like in the more mechanical engineering front. And I applied to MIT completely on a whim. I had no chance that I was gonna get in. And you know, I got this little small envelope with nothing in it that my mom opened because she felt it figured it was a rejection. And then she called me, was like, oh my gosh, you were accepted to MIT. And this is the olden days, right? So MIT sent you a booklet of like what all the professors were doing.

SPEAKER_00 6:27

Wow.

SPEAKER_01 6:28

Yeah, and they're like, you know, look at look through these, see if there's any professors you want to get faculty you want to get in touch with, and then show up if you want to come. And I'm looking through, and I'm like, there's some interesting things here, interesting here. And there was this one guy, Seth Floyd, and he was doing this quantum computing stuff. And I'm like, that sounds really weird. What I wonder what that is. And so I make a trip out to MIT so I can talk to the publisher presses. I walk into Seth's office, and um, and I was I was mesmerized. And we had a great conversation, and he was like, if you want to work for me, I'm happy to have you. And that's how it started. And I had no, I had no idea what it was gonna be. I'm like, I was like, this this looks like fun, and I got to learn about things like entanglement, quantum chaos, you know, some of the my earlier papers, and um and it was and it was great, and we had a great time. And uh yeah, you know, I started working also with Professor David Corey, who's now at Waterloo, also a wonderful, wonderful, you know, professor. He and he and Seth were just so helpful in terms of my growth as a scientist and as a person. I I also and uh and but I had no idea. You know, I remember going to conferences and meetings where everybody who was interested in the field sat in a room that was, you know, maybe three times the size of the room we're in right now. And I knew all of that. And I knew everybody. And as a side point, there were no women. There was like one graduate student who was female. Everybody else was everybody else.

SPEAKER_00 7:43

Even now it's a struggle. Even now, even now.

SPEAKER_01 7:46

And and but to think that there would be large world girdling corporations that are actually spending money to actually do something like this, I had no idea. It was impossible to know. It was impossible to know. And I I love it. It's amazing. We have the the ecosphere is wonderful. People that I would get to work with outside of MITRE are really want to do positive, constructive things, not only for their own companies and for their own you know careers, but are really looking out. It's it's huge. I don't know everybody anymore, of course. I try to know as many people as I can, but it's it's amazing.

SPEAKER_00 8:17

And everyone is so excited. I can say that the same as being an outsider who's getting into quantum. People are very friendly and they they're very happy to share the knowledge.

SPEAKER_01 8:25

And people want to talk about it. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 8:26

And that's the you really feel, you know. I remember uh I'm I'm Polish, I mentioned that before. And I remember when uh you know some time ago when the startup ecosystem was uh shifting in Poland, yeah, and there was this excitement coming from Silicon Valley. Obviously, it was like five or ten years later after Silicon Valley because everything comes with a wave. Uh but but the energy. I remember the energy. I was like 21 at that time. And right now I feel the same energy in quantum. Yeah. And that's it's amazing. It is amazing. It's like I wasn't that excited for a long time.

SPEAKER_01 8:58

Yeah, for people who go to Quantum.tech or Quantum World Congress, you go and it's like it's just the same. So the energy, right? And I uh you know, they do a wonderful job at both of these conferences. I'm I just want to be like in the exhibition area where everybody is and just like feeling that all these people you know have common goals and they're all working together, they're all trying to and it's still a relatively small ecosystem where you can see. It is relatively small, it's growing bigger than it was.

SPEAKER_00 9:25

But you will see if you go in a couple of different conferences, you will see the same faces in some cases. But let's talk about because one of the buzzwords in the industry is obviously quantum error correction. Yes.

SPEAKER_02 9:37

Right?

SPEAKER_00 9:37

You're the best person to to ask about it.

SPEAKER_02 9:40

Thank you.

SPEAKER_00 9:41

You have more than a hundred papers, quantum error correction.

SPEAKER_02 9:44

Related areas.

SPEAKER_00 9:45

Yeah, probably like three thousand citations. So I definitely think you're the best person. Could you please explain? Because a lot of people talk about it, it's a it's a it's a hot topic, but nobody really explained that for outsiders and for the benefits of our audience who are usually non-technical. Can you please explain what is quantum uh error correction and why it is so important and why it's so hard?

SPEAKER_01 10:11

So let's start with let's start with error correction itself. And error correction per se doesn't have to be quantum. There's also regular your conventional error correction. So let's we're having a conversation, right? Let's say it was noisy in the room. So what would I do in order to like make sure that you heard me? I can talk louder, yeah, right, and that might that might help. Or I can repeat myself.

SPEAKER_02 10:30

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 10:31

Right. So let's say let's take an easy, I'm let's say I'm just saying yes or no, right? So I can try to as much as I can to shout yes, or I can say yes, yes, yes. Right. And so what I've done there, just in in this repeating it multiple times, is I've given you, I'm trying to transfer information to you by saying yes. And, you know, on the one hand, by saying yes three times, I'm limiting the amount of information that I'm sending you, because they could have answered three questions rather than one, the amount of time. On the other hand, I'm ensuring that you actually get that information, right? Such that even if you didn't hear one or two of that, one or two of the times, or you heard no instead of yes, which is, you know, which which may be possible, you can kind of take a majority count to say, well, you know, I heard yes twice, and I knew that we're two blocks of three, and you would be able to know that the answer that I'm trying to get to you is yes. That's error correction. That's beautiful. That's what it is. That's beautiful. And so if if you wanted to, and if you were taking that information then and transferring it off to somebody else, what you would do is you might see yes, no, yes, because you may have you know misheard one of them, and you would say, Oh, you know, that no has to be a yes, and now I'm gonna send it on to somebody else as yes, yes, yes, and that was just repeated down the chain or until until we get to the you know, so that's what we're doing for quantum computers. So that's what we are doing for quantum computers. If there's an error, if one turns into a zero or zero turns into one, we want to encode, right? So we want to in let's say embed the information in such a way in multiple bits or multiple quantum bits for quantum computers, multiple qubits, such that the person looking, right, can correct the error and then go on with the computation. Now, because it's quantum mechanics and quantum mechanics, measurement does something, right? Measurement isn't just a passive state of looking at a system, but it actually will change the state of your system. That's where a lot of the complexity comes in. Because you can't just say, oh, I'm gonna look at it and everything's gonna be fine. No, no, no, no. It it's not. Once you look at it, you've changed things. And so you have to ensure that your information is encoded in such a way, such that despite the fact that you may have looked at some things, you can still get back to the states, the original states of your system that you wanted to. So that's where all the complexity comes in. Now, error correction, quantum error correction is mathematically beautiful. There's all sorts of wonderful things. There are all sorts of you know interesting math in it. But in terms of the basic idea, it's really just the same as saying yes three times. It's really not, it's it's really not much different. Yeah. And so um I I have to admit that like I I love the math in these more complex surface codes and low density parity check codes, LDPC. But I I I wonder sometimes whether we're being you know too fancy and whether we're, you know, and again, not to not in any way to to look down on those codes, they're they're amazing. But do we just need to make our basic qubits better so that we don't have to use such complexity in our error correction? That is one of the questions that hangs over me on this area.

SPEAKER_00 13:14

Speaking about how far do you think we are from having like a proper fault tolerant quantum computer?

SPEAKER_01 13:22

Depends on the day.

SPEAKER_00 13:23

Okay. So you have the ops as well. It's good to know.

SPEAKER_01 13:26

I I I do. I have to say that you know, looking at the ecosphere as a whole, I would say I'm more on the pessimistic side. I've always been that way, despite the fact that I've been doing this my entire career.

SPEAKER_00 13:35

Um sometimes the dose of pessimistic is yeah, it's good for the reality check.

SPEAKER_01 13:40

I I I and and you know, sometimes I'm completely fired up. I'm like, yes, you know, these companies are doing amazing, and they are. They are doing amazing. Um and sometimes like, this is just all gonna fail. I don't know. It's gonna really, it's gonna really work.

SPEAKER_00 13:51

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 13:51

So I I I'm I'm hopeful. I'm cheering it on. Okay, okay.

SPEAKER_00 13:55

So you do have it's very interesting that that hearing that even people like you have sometimes doubt. So did you have like a genuine thought ever that hey, maybe this approach we have for uh current quantum error correction is like a dead end. Yes.

SPEAKER_01 14:10

It's not gonna go anywhere. Yes. But like let me let me back up just just for a moment. The the quest itself, I like term this as a quest, because special cost has even a Q at the beginning, so it's you know the quest for quantum, right? Is an amaz it's an amazing quest, even if it ends in failure in terms of not being able to produce a false tolerant quantum computer, um, which again, depending on the day, you know, but the quest itself is worth it. We've learned so much as in humanity, we understand so much more, we can do technologies that are completely different than they were in the 19 in the 1990s. We've accomplished so much. And it's sometimes it's hard to see because we haven't reached that end where we want to take a deep breath and look back. But sometimes in like in the middle, it's worth taking a deep breath and looking back and realizing that things like entanglement studies, which is one of the things that I, you know, that that that I find you know very interesting, didn't exist not that long ago. Yeah, that's a good thing.

SPEAKER_00 15:06

Yeah, absolutely. Okay, that's good to know. What about the big companies? Because, you know, if we talk about um large companies, Google, IBM, Microsoft, every quarter or so. Every quarter or so, they publish some new announcements about milestones and that field of error quantum correction, and then the press is covering it all is a big show and so on. And now I can tell you from my perspective on people who are outsiders, like it's far hard for us to find themselves in uh in in that environment because it's very hard to differ like what's real, what's not. We know obviously those public companies they also have you know quarterly earning callings. They they need to generate some buzz and be better than that.

SPEAKER_01 15:50

They should report on their progress.

SPEAKER_00 15:52

Yeah. So the question for you will be how you differ. Was like a real signal? How do you defer the real signal from like maybe more marketing or just pumping?

SPEAKER_01 16:02

So I think it you know, we try to talk to the companies themselves as much as we can. We try to look at whatever they've they they've put out, and we try to give as real as a realistic assessment as we can to our government sponsors. I get plenty of phone calls all the time.

SPEAKER_00 16:16

So you are in the sky falling, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 16:18

You know, this is gonna happen. Yeah, we're so we're supported by at any one at any given point in time.

SPEAKER_00 16:22

So basically, do you know first, even before the the the press release are going out, so you know what they're working on? Are they sharing with you?

SPEAKER_01 16:30

Sometimes we'll put NDAs in place and we'll and and and we'll get a a better idea. But and that depends on the company and you know, and their internal goals as well. And their internal goals. Of course, we only share what you know what the companies want allow us to share. We're not um our our goal is trying to make things.

SPEAKER_00 16:45

I also work as an advisor for those government institutional who are the sponsor.

SPEAKER_01 16:49

Uh absolutely.

SPEAKER_00 16:50

Yeah. So you advise, okay, we check we did the benchmark here, here. We recommend to go with with that conversation.

SPEAKER_01 16:55

Correct. And and and again, the government has various different types of questions, so depending on depending on what it is. But I I get plenty of calls. The sky is falling, you know, we're everything's gonna break tomorrow.

SPEAKER_03 17:05

Every other week is falling.

SPEAKER_01 17:07

Is this real? Does this make any sense or these people? And and um, and we want to make sure that we give again, you know, as with without any sort of hype or like any sort of commercials, this is what the these companies are up to, this is what they're doing, this is what's really important, this is what's perhaps not as important, and and and really try to paint that picture as an in a objective way as possible. And and again, you know, it I I in in in no way am I suggesting that the companies are fabricating anything. They're not they're doing amazing work.

SPEAKER_00 17:38

Yeah, but I you know, my point was that some masters are more significant or meaningful, and some are less, right?

SPEAKER_01 17:44

Not everything is a breakthrough. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, and I I I I admit that it's not the company's job to make my job easier, but my job would be easier if the word breakthrough was not attached to everything, that's for sure.

SPEAKER_00 17:55

It's also a media role, right? Creating this hype and stuff and so on, because that affects the price of shares. Uh that's all big things. That's beyond me. I'm just a physicist. Speaking of, actually, the the market is very hot right now. This this year we have we just yesterday, right, continuum, get on the on the IPO. Yes. And this year we have another six, seven coming. So I I mean it's it's it's are you happy about it from that perspective? This is more attention.

SPEAKER_01 18:21

I I'm happy to see growth. I'm happy to see attention. I I am very much an evangelist for education though. Um, having attention just for the sake of attention from people who may not understand as well, I think it'd be problematic. And then, but that's part of our job. We want people to understand. You know, we want it we want to help as much as we can to get everybody, the government, the consumer, the companies, students, get them to really have a good understanding of what's going on.

SPEAKER_00 18:46

That's great. Okay. I would love to change a little bit of topic and talk about national security actually trade and your last report that you that you publish. So you publish it for intelligence community, and this report is talking about the quantum computer being able to break the famous RSA 2048. Maybe you can also explain what it is for for the sake of our audience. But basically, you are placing that moment in the window between 2055 and I'm correct, and 2060. Correct. All right. So let's talk a little bit about that. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 19:23

So, okay, so just for just for your listeners, in case they're in case they may not be aware, RSA is a encryption process. It's a way of protecting data such that, for example, when you put your credit card number into Amazon or whatever it might be, people can't come and steal it. And it's protected by the fact that conventional computers have a really hard time factoring large numbers. So for factoring, uh if I have the number 15, the factors of 15 are three and five. So three times five equals 15, and therefore the factor of 15 is three times five. It turns out the multiplication is relatively straightforward. Factoring is really hard because basically what you do is guess. Maybe you ever try to factor a big number, you kind of like this multiple of fours, multiple eight, you know, you both you want to use odd numbers, but so that's how that's how it works. And um, obviously the government and businesses are want to make sure that whatever information they are sending over channels, especially public channels, is protected. So therefore the the milestone of being able to break to RSA 2048, where 2048 is the number of bits in in what's called the key, is a mild is it's an important milestone. It's important milestones for for for the economy as a whole. Um and that's why we ch that's why that's why we chose it. The other thing that we think is very important and was an an assumption in the in the graph that we printed that report, and that report is publicly available, is there is that there has to be there have to be metrics. And that's something that we want because metrics are nice because it's just a number and there's no hype in a number. It is just it is just a number.

SPEAKER_00 20:51

Yeah, and speaking of actually, I think like the community is pushing farther away these numbers every five years. Absolutely. Absolutely. So we first heard like 2030, then 2035 for different stuff, and and now we're going farther and farther. So um actually there's a question for you here as well on this. In that in that fast changing environment, yeah, right, how do you build relationships and maintain your credibility when dealing with a policy makers about those timelines? Because they must be very confused. It's like yeah, it's it's a really good question.

SPEAKER_01 21:25

And that's and that's why we rely on metrics.

SPEAKER_00 21:27

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 21:28

And that's what we in in the in the main graph in that in that report, what we did is we just applied to the metrics, yeah, as reported by various companies, yeah, uh as a function of time. And then all we did was say, hey, look, there's a trend here, you know, there's something that looks more or less like a straight line, and you can follow that trend. And if you do, you'll get to breaking RSA 2048 somewhere, you know, there's not an exact Calicial Asia, but somewhere in that 2055, 2060 range.

SPEAKER_00 21:51

So actually let's speak about these metrics as well, because this is fascinating. I think in the in the report itself, you said that if some condition would be met, an advanced In quantum computing will will go much faster than we expected, then this breakthrough moment can come even in 203 uh 35. Yes. Right? That's correct. So what actually needs to happen for that to happen for that to happen? For for the moment to happen in 2045.

SPEAKER_01 22:16

So that's that's a good question. And not sure I have the I I don't have one answer. Yeah. But what what we assumed in the in in the graph is that error correction will kick in. Companies will be able to start use using error correction protect the information such that the algorithms can run for a longer time and therefore be able to perform all of these mathematical feats in a you know in a sh in a short in a shorter amount of time. That's that's the assumption. And but and but our goal was to say, listen, this is the trend. If you, company A, want to tell me that you're gonna be able to accomplish this by 2035, wonderful. Tell me why you're gonna break the trend. And this is not a secret. We published it publicly on purpose, and I've shown it to all the companies. So this is no no one's no one's no one's arguing on like on the data. The data is the data. And the the answer, it's the the typical answer, which I think is an accurate one, is that if error correction functions and works in the way that we hope it will, we'll be able to speed things up. And that's great. But the but the graph just shows that so we're not making any predictions per se. We're showing where the trend is going. And if you could break the trend, wonderful. This is where it might break. It might break when you first get error correction. It might break when error correction plus being able to perform basic computational gates within the error correction code, such that you never have to leave that error correction code and subject yourself to errors. Those are possible points where, okay, we might think we might see things speed up. It might be the opposite. It might be that error correction makes things harder for us. Longer. Right. And therefore, and therefore it'll actually take longer. Nobody wants to think about it. We don't know. No one wants to think that. And and and and we want to be optimistic about it. Um, but we don't we don't know. We don't know. But you know, I think the companies are are hopeful, and therefore I want to be hopeful too, and we'll we'll see what happens to you.

SPEAKER_00 23:55

Do you ever feel that it may be actually self-fulfilling in the sense that you know when we publish in such important reports any data, right? And we talk so much about the global race right now. So when we public any even white data or white window for the for the data, that actually the opponents of US, which are in this case obviously the other countries, the elephant in the room, we all know who other countries are. That they they actually seeing it, they double down, for example, or triple down their budget to, you know, for RD and trying to trying to speed up on this as well.

SPEAKER_01 24:31

I think there's always a concern. And I think we have to be you we we always want to be careful to make sure that there's uh there's a balance. Uh things like classified information exists for a reason. But in general, I think what we found is that being open with the public is the better move.

SPEAKER_00 24:45

Is the better move. Is the better move. Is it possible that they make it awareness? Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 24:49

Is it is it possible that our adversaries may take some of what we're publishing and then rearrange their you know funding based on that? Sure, it's possible. Um but the benefits, I think, in this case outweighed, you know, far outweighed something like that.

SPEAKER_00 25:02

So this is not keeping you awake at night. That's not particularly awake at night.

SPEAKER_01 25:07

And go and going back to the other question in terms of like how do we maintain trust with our sponsors and with the government with the federal government, despite not something being. Yeah. So it's it's it's a function of trying to be as blunt and data oriented and as we can. And and and show that and that's why we made that initial graph was to say, listen, this is where it is, this is where the trend is, this is why the companies may be telling you otherwise. They're not they're not stupid, they're not idiots, they have their reasons. This is their rat this is their rationale for it. Let me tell you why I think that might happen. Let me tell you why I think that that moment might not happen. And then the other the the the other important point is that there's there's a there's a cost-benefit analysis for all of this. And we're saying, I can give a government a sponsor, I can say, listen, I think this, I I think there's such percentage likelihood that X might happen, as percentage likelihood that Y might happen. You have to make the call as to what you might want to do about it. So there's a difference between you and I betting, you know, on dinner, right? And the government betting on national security. And so it's not my job to make that call. It's the people, it's the people's job who know national security. It's their job. Yeah. And and and that's why MITRE, for example, is such a great place and why we work with our government sponsors, so that we can put all the people in the room. Exactly. So that I'm in the room, and then the people who understand national security are in the room, and the people who understand like the capabilities of of the US and of various other countries, they're all you can all be in the room and try to, you know, try to come up with the code.

SPEAKER_00 26:35

Contribute and then decision are made. Yeah. And then you just remind me because uh it just got to realization it's not always about the budget itself as well, right? Because some stuff cannot be spit it up as we as we wish. Uh actually in the in the programming when when I was in university, we we had this saying, or our professor was saying, that yes, one woman can produce a baby in nine months, but nine women can not necessarily produce a baby in one month, right? It's not always about the budget.

SPEAKER_01 27:01

Correct. There's a lot that goes into there's a lot that goes into everything. And you know, we're hopeful. And and obviously you can't predict, you can't predict or put on your schedule a breakthrough.

SPEAKER_00 27:09

Yeah. Uh you can plan it. Uh okay. And what about the harvest now, the crypt later? Yes. This is also a very famous saying right now, and I strongly believe that a lot of enterprise and even smaller companies, because maybe enterprise they or they have the quantum teams, they're more aware, more educated, as you said. But the the smaller and medium-sized companies, they are kind of starting to be scary about that. Um also some consumers. Uh, because as you mentioned, like, hey, when I'm putting my credit card into Amazon, I want that to be safe, right? Um, the same with my personal medical data and so on and so on. So the question here is how this threat is real, right? For for medium-sized companies, for also um consumers and consumers. And if that is already happening, who is collecting really that data?

SPEAKER_01 27:59

Right. So so we we assume that there are adversaries out there that are certainly collecting data that would be important for the United States. I'm not I I don't know who might be collecting, it's not this is not my area, who might be collecting data on specific, you know, companies, big companies versus medium-sized companies versus versus small companies. I'm very happy about how much attention the government has paid to this. Okay. Um very, very serious. We're we're you know, we're Americans, we vote, we do all sorts of wonderful things, we all complain about the government. It's a freedom of speech. That's right, and it's good, it's a wonderful thing. But um but the government's done a really a really good job with this, you know, trying to alert the public as to what uh what can happen, trying to mobilize CISA and other government agencies in to try to make sure that we are protected. But I I I think that also we have to be realistic about it. People steal other people's credit card numbers all the time. Yeah, so yeah.

SPEAKER_00 28:51

I think actually in the US, there's a basically a big problem with the amount of spam we're gathering.

SPEAKER_01 28:57

And and and there's no that's not a quantum thing. That's uh that's that's in general.

SPEAKER_00 29:00

I know.

SPEAKER_01 29:01

There's not the DPI and not me, for example, or I think most you know, most US citizens are not gonna be the target of some adversary, you know, trying to steal the case.

SPEAKER_00 29:14

The critical infrastructure.

SPEAKER_01 29:16

And I think you know, companies have to um I mean, I'm I'm a big fan of education. So again, as I mentioned before, I'm evangelizing for that. So I want everybody to be aware of what's going on 100%. But the companies have to look at themselves objectively and say, am I generally more, let's say, reactionary or am I you know pro? You know, when when when a new uh when a new security system comes out, do I kind of wait for it to make sure that's good, make sure it's working well? And that's the type of company that that I work for. And there's no need for me. There's not, isn't there's not a better or worse. This is just what type of company you have. There's no need for me to be the cutting edge, the first user on uh on security. Or are you the type of company that needs to be on that cutting edge, right? And that needs to make sure that not only can I use the new systems, but I can arrange them, manipulate them in a way that's necessary for my company. Then you might but want to be more uh of of a first user. So again, I think a lot of this boils down to knowing what the threat is, understanding what the threat is, understanding what's available, understanding what's available now, because what's available now is not necessarily what's going to be available a year from now. Yeah. And then asking, you know, trying to be as objective as possible with what the company needs and coming up with a with a proper solution.

SPEAKER_00 30:27

This is very securing that you said that the government's paying a lot of attention to it. But I as we speak a couple of times throughout the education part is also super important, right? Especially as you said, education is the way to go. Okay, good. I wanted also to talk about what happened in 2024, I think. NIST National Institute for Standard and Technology. Thank you. So they publish a guidance for standards for post uh post-quantum category. Yeah, exactly. So do you see from your practice right now that this is actively implemented in the companies and government institutions, or is more trying to think ahead that this will be needed, and right now it's just a regulation for more for theater kind of so there are a couple of different government agencies that are doing this.

SPEAKER_01 31:20

There's NIST, and then there's also NSA. For those who may want to, who those who are interested, you may want to look at CNSA 2.0, which is guidance for security published by the NSA for national security systems. It's open. You can search for it, you'll you'll you'll you'll find it. And it's it's actually very it's a very readable document.

SPEAKER_02 31:38

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 31:38

And it gives a timeline for when national security systems need to transition to new post-quantum cryptography protocols. Um, it identifies the protocols in the document and tells you by the year 20, I don't remember the exact numbers, but yeah, by the year 2032, you need to have implemented by 2033, these things.

SPEAKER_00 31:56

So but it's a relevant. Is it guidance or obligation for those calls?

SPEAKER_01 31:59

For national security systems, which is government, yeah, it's required.

SPEAKER_00 32:02

Okay. It's a requirement.

SPEAKER_01 32:03

Industry can do whatever it wants.

SPEAKER_00 32:05

Yeah. But for like hospital and financial institution?

SPEAKER_01 32:08

So I don't I'm not sure. Yeah. Um, I think I I don't know what's considered national security systems officially or not. The people who run those, they know it. Yeah, they know it, and that's you know, that's that's sufficient. And so it's it's the the document is very is is very clear whether the software and the protocols are there yet, uh, whether the protocols are in software yet and ready to be used. That is there, there are plenty of companies who are working on it, and that's wonderful. They need to be you know given a given a check mark by by whoever it is, NIST or NSA or or or whatever the appropriate um government agency is, and then yeah, people will start being able to use it.

SPEAKER_00 32:41

To implement that. And from your uh perspective, when you observe that who is better right now or more up to date with those regulations, is the government institutions or private sector? We both have a different interest.

SPEAKER_01 32:53

Yeah, they they they both do. I I'm I don't know. I'm I'm not sure that I can properly answer that question. That's right, that's right. Okay, good.

SPEAKER_00 32:58

Maybe we can talk a little bit about the fact that quantum technologies in general, not only quantum computing, is obviously very revolutionary. And a lot of people are yeah, saying this is the big next big thing, this is the next AI, and so on. But the critics on the other side saying, hey, how much is this actually important? Because for some of the skiller application that we usually keep repeating, so drug discovery optimization, uh, some of the financial application and so on, those critics say that maybe more advanced AI plus classical computer enough power can solve that, and we will not need the quantum computer. So a question for you as a quantum computer expert is what is really the capabilities that uh you know quantum computers are bringing to the table? Right.

SPEAKER_01 33:52

So let me answer that on a couple of different levels. So, first of all, I I I don't love the word revolutionary. I can't say that I've never used it, but I don't I don't love the word remote. I'll tell you why I think it's a revolutionary. But before we even before we even get there, the quest itself, right? The ability to think from a quantum perspective has already given benefits in things that are, for example, called quantum inspired. Right. So there are now approaches to AI, imaging, other things that people only figured out because they came from a quantum perspective and then realized, oh, you know what? You don't actually need the quantum part of this. But they came about it because they went through that bank cut, you know, of of of thinking about thinking about quantum. So so in and of itself, you know, they again the quest is worthwhile. In terms of the quantum computer and its its capabilities, okay, so one more one more step. There's also the idea of being able to harness natural phenomena, right? So at one point, humanity was not able to harness electronics, right?

SPEAKER_02 34:45

True.

SPEAKER_01 34:46

And then people made um people made a lightning rod.

SPEAKER_02 34:49

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 34:49

Right. And then people started making other labels. Right. And and so one way to look at this is that there are these quantum phenomena out there, some of which we've already harnessed. That's why we have things like lasers and diodes and things like that. Some of which some of which we haven't. And that those are the ones that enable, you know, quantum computers and various sense types types of quantum sensors, for example. And so, you know, the ability to harness new natural phenomena that we weren't able to before, to me is revolutionary and revolutionary in and of itself. Right. Okay. Humanity has advanced. And what that advan where that advance might take us, we don't know.

SPEAKER_02 35:21

Right.

SPEAKER_01 35:22

We don't know. If we go, if we focus then in on the quantum computers and the way we look at quantum computers now, you know, is it possible that any specific answer, any specific challenge may be met by AI? Possibly. However, when we deal with algorithms like Shure's algorithm to factor large numbers, and the mode of others algorithms that are, let's say, based on what's called the quantum Fourier transforms over those. If you have a chance, look it up. That was that basis my thesis. So I have to bring it up. They they provide an exponential speed up over current, over conventional computers. Yeah. In terms of, forget the hardware itself, in terms of the approach from a theoretical quantum, a theoretical computer science perspective. And therefore, I I don't want to doubt anything, but therefore I I I believe that things like factoring large numbers, solving uh sets of linear equations, which is another and the eight, what's called the AHL algorithm, where L is actually cephalite, who was my advisor. Those those a quantum computer using those algorithms provide an exponential speed up. And I don't really see, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't really see that conventional computers will be able to match a fully capable quantum computer. I'm not talking about today's quantum computers.

SPEAKER_00 36:30

So basically what you're saying is it's just a step. It's just a step. It's not about evolution in the sense.

SPEAKER_01 36:36

Again, it depends what you call revolution. It depends what you call revolution. Right. I I mean it for for progression. For certain people and their jobs, that's revolutionary. Yeah. Right? That's true. And for some people, and for some people it's not.

SPEAKER_00 36:48

Always about perspective. Right.

SPEAKER_01 36:49

So you never know. Right. You say so you never know. Let me let me let me give actually another example. Let me take the next step because I I like thinking of capabilities of quantum computers in two steps. They're the immediate ones, right? A quantum computer can solve this set of equations. A quantum computer can factor this number, right? Then there's the next step, which is a quantum computer can, for example, simulate chemical reactions in a way that conventional computers can't. Okay, wonderful. Right. But if quantum computers can help us understand, for example, for example, why certain materials superconduct and thereby give us, help us design a superconductor that could work somewhere around room temperature, that's we'll change. That is revolutionary.

SPEAKER_00 37:28

And they will change the remote.

SPEAKER_01 37:29

It's secondary, right? Because the quantum, you can't program into a quantum computer, find a superconductor that'll give me, right? You can't do that. Yeah. But once you, if you have that model and you know, and and people who are able to, who understand superconducting theory and quantum computers can work to find that superconductor.

SPEAKER_00 37:46

Basically, we're on the stage that we don't know yet what we don't know.

SPEAKER_01 37:48

It's a tool it's a tool. Yeah. The quantum computers are a tool. They may provide revolutionary applications, but the computer itself, right, is not isn't necessarily what's doing it. Nitrogen fixation, right? Being able to compute being able to um create ammonia from nitrogen gas. Hugely important. I think that's a good thing. Billions of dollars. You know, can quantum computers help us do that? I don't know. But maybe. Um, is there a better chance that quantum computers could than conventional computers could? Right now, I think the answer is yes. I think the quantum computers would be more helpful than conventional computers.

SPEAKER_00 38:20

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 38:21

So that's why I think that's what I'm saying. That's why I have like, you know, back and forth on the word revolutionary. It can be revolutionary. Yeah. But we can't state that it is revolutionary.

SPEAKER_00 38:29

What what is your approach for the budget on research on both? Because I read recently that NISC opened together two labs, right? Based on the AI, economy, security, and so on. So a question I asked myself when I was reading it was how this match with the quantum in terms of the research that you do in your team. Is this something that is going in parallel or is it intersect?

SPEAKER_01 38:56

Yeah. So, you know, at a place like MITRE, AI, A AI dwarfs quantum. There are a lot more people at MITRE doing AI than there are quantum.

SPEAKER_03 39:02

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 39:02

Um, but we defin we we definitely want to be part of it and are part of it. And so that takes on a coup a couple of levels. We are very interested in quantum machine learning, right? And quantum quantum AI. And so that kind of dovetails into what's into what they're doing. We're also interested in what AI can do to help quantum computing, right? Can they help do help us design certain things better? Can they help us come up with new error correction codes? So it really is it really is a two-way partnership. Yeah. Uh and you know, I think we're very fortunate because it's such a social networked place that we can really talk to people and this is actually a very good example.

SPEAKER_00 39:36

I never thought about it. AI could potentially help to find the new algorithms for quantum error.

SPEAKER_01 39:41

New algorithms, numeric new error correction, yeah. Also, new use key, all sorts of interesting things. That's so cool.

SPEAKER_00 39:46

Okay, that's good. We're going slowly to to wrapping up our time. I want to be respectful, but I have a couple of questions for you more. And on the end, usually I have this tradition that I'm ask actually asking them because like you for future. So that will be definitely the question, question on this. But you mentioned previously a Petershaw, and I cannot stop myself to ask about that. So, first of all, if you can explain what Petershaw algorithm in 1994 was, uh why it was so important that he created that. So if you can start with this and then I will ask my question.

SPEAKER_01 40:20

Absolutely. So maybe Peter Schwer's algorithm was revolutionary. Peter Schwer came up with an algorithm which allowed, um, enabled a quantum computer, which in 1995, when he discovered it, there was not even anything close to it, right? Would be able to factor large numbers and therefore break RSA and the like. The reason was important is because it was the first example of a very practical, hard-nosed thing that people could point to and say, yes, this is why a quantum computer, if we could ever build one, is better than a conventional.

SPEAKER_00 40:50

And he did it completely theoretically.

SPEAKER_01 40:51

And it's completely theoretical.

SPEAKER_00 40:52

There's no hardware, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 40:54

No, no. If those who haven't had a chance to hear him talk, that he has certain things at YouTube, I highly recommend it. So cool.

SPEAKER_00 40:59

And he said it will take 50 years, right? So we still have some time. But but and you're working on this as well. But obviously, you know, we still at least 30 years far.

SPEAKER_02 41:11

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 41:12

Right. So so so I bet as well, because you kind of in a sense continue the work that that Fitzhaw started for most of your life. So do you have do you have any reflection sometimes on it that the work that you perform one day may cause the there will be a significant damage for people's life, right? And may really cause the break of the systems which are life-threatening, the in critical infrastructure, the hospitals, the technology.

SPEAKER_01 41:43

Absolutely. So I I think anyone who deals with emerging technologies has to at some point have that in their mind.

SPEAKER_00 41:48

The dynamics paradox?

SPEAKER_01 41:49

Yeah, and obviously anyone who was thinking who's doing nuclear in the 1940s and 1950s, that's an extreme example. Yeah. But even the people who made the printing press, right? How many scribes went out of because of the printing press? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Right. So any any one of these technol technology technology, certainly revolutions, right? But even smaller things. On the other hand, you know, I mean, we we think about the industrial industrial revolution, right? And we think about, I mean, there were people that were treated horribly, right? We we all know that. A lot of people lost jobs. Lost jobs and and and worse, were treated as I don't even want to go, we don't even want to. On the other hand, how many of us would rather have to use an outhouse, right? Than a construction. Exactly. So I think that's I I think that's always an I think it's always an issue. I'm very glad to see that there are people who are concerned about this and want to make sure that this is done responsibly in a way that's hopefully before things really come become become fully mature. But I think at the end of the day, if we look back at human progress, humanity's actually not done such a bad job. I mean, we all know there was a couple of cases, but it's a really good idea. But I mean, I I would say in a general sense, humanity is thriving.

SPEAKER_00 42:55

So we should have a we should have a faith in the humanity.

SPEAKER_01 42:59

I I I hope so. I mean it's easy, it's easy to be negative because we can always we can all point to things that are that are not fair and and the like. But true. Yeah. So that that's my general approach to it.

SPEAKER_00 43:09

I I like it. It's very optimistic, I like it. I'm more on the optimistic side, usually. Okay. What another question will be from your perspective, and saying a lot of things, and uh, you know, performing a research on on different topics as well. Is there any research right now going on in quantum which may be underestimated or not getting as much attention as it's supposed to be?

SPEAKER_01 43:32

I I I wish the quantum sensors got a bit more attention.

SPEAKER_00 43:34

Sensor? Yeah. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 43:35

Various sensors. Actually, they are, yeah, right. They're they're getting they're getting some attention. The way the way I want to look at it is going back, for example, to electronics, because I think there are parallels. I'm not sure it'll be as revolutionary. I don't I I don't think so, but still there are parallels. Right. You start off with the easiest things and then you go to the harder things. True. Right. Quantum sensors, in a general sense, in terms of your ability to control quantum phenomenon, are easier than quantum computers. There's like a there's a ladder here that we're trying to build. And once we once we can do the easy stuff, it'll be easier for us to do the do the harder stuff. And that's where I think, you know, we need to pract I like the term practicing quantum. I made it up. I don't know if anybody else. But we need to practice quantum. And we should practice with quantum sensors because they can provide impact to obviously we I think of it from a government perspective because that's who I work for. But I think um in in general for the public, you know, for the public as well. And then once people are it it works in both ways. Once people can learn to control these things, they can build better systems, they can you know become engineers as opposed to necessarily physicists. And both of those are important. There's not one that's true, you know. We need we need both. And then the the the public can be more educated about it, the public become more used to it. And and again, I'm I I I I do very much worry that people look at quantum as as magic when when or speaking. We like magic. And it's uncalled such, and it's you know, and very small people obviously call it, you know, probably got it spooky, which it is. But but we want people to kind of you know get used to the fact that this is another this is another part of the stuff.

SPEAKER_00 45:00

It's true, right? And uh the future we can use stuff that we don't even understand how that works. It it's how many of us today really understand how well you do, but you know no matter what we can my gener my generation, I'm probably older than you.

SPEAKER_01 45:13

Yeah, my generation grew up on you know, the the scientists grew up on looking at books on you know the solar system and on dinosaurs. Yeah, exactly. Quantum is just as exciting. It is just as exciting as as Voyager, and Voyager is amazing, it was one of the most amazing things that people have ever that humanity has ever done. And quantum, quantum mechanics, quantum melties, it's just as exciting. We don't have the kids' books yet, or absolutely we should. Yeah, absolutely. We should. We should have it.

SPEAKER_00 45:38

Good business idea.

SPEAKER_01 45:39

We should, and we should have it at you know, science museums. We need exhibits on quantum so much to do. There is, and people are working on it. I'm so inspired by the fact that people are you know are interested in it. The more the better. And the area we start to teach uh and again, the kids don't need to stop Schrdinger's equation, right? Which is the basic equation of quantum mechanics. But you know, but just like you know, I read about Jupiter and its moons and Saturn and it's really. And that's making you into like into sign and it's a lot of people.

SPEAKER_00 46:09

You are 100% right. It's a great idea. Okay, I was about to ask you actually a last question, but I remind myself something that I need to ask you from my personal curiosity. You mentioned, and I read that before once I was prepared prepared for the interview, about the paper that you uh published recently about imagining. About imaging. About imaging, yeah. Yeah. So that's something kind of far from your standard day-to-day job. So I was very curious about this because I see a lot of startups, well, maybe not a lot, but I see it a certainly few startups trying to tackle the problem as well from a quantum quantum perspective. And this is very important uh because it can be revolutionary. It can be very important for the health sake, for you know, diagnosis. And my background is in health tech. So can you tell us a little bit more about that?

SPEAKER_01 46:58

Absolutely. So so right now I'm my my interests are my own, plus what uh my whole team likes. And so we have it, we have an effort of quantum machine learning. Uh Kubriatra Idenez is was the you know the the main author for MITRE on on that work. She's incredible. And so I am very much riding her coattails. But but what we were doing is we were trying to create what's called synthetic data. So data that's not you know real but looks real for the purposes of being able to apply AI to medical images. Um, so for example, we were looking specifically in that paper at knee at knee x-rays. And, you know, so we want we want to be able to have AI kind of analyze knee x-rays, but we don't have enough data for people who have really bad knees. Yeah. Because thank God there are less people who have really bad knees that have, you know, perfectly fine knees. So so we want to can create synthetic data for that. And this was a really great example of interdisciplinary working. We were working with um uh a team from Australia, um, but internally we also worked with people from uh the health the health part of NIDER, the health organization, so that we could, you know, really get a good um uh holistic picture on what's going on. Cleveland Clinic has done great work on on quantum for medical purposes. And uh yeah, it's it wasn't my typical, typical fair, but it's uh it's it's it's exciting.

SPEAKER_00 48:09

And it's this came from personal interest team in Europe.

SPEAKER_01 48:13

It was it was it was much more the team than me. But once the team is doing it, then I was totally. All in.

SPEAKER_00 48:18

That's that's great. Actually, I'm I'm waiting for something for uh Lanx imagining as well, because one of the bigger problems here is with the Lynx cancer and so on. They can be diagnosed usually. Well, they are usually diagnosed too late.

SPEAKER_02 48:30

Right. Right.

SPEAKER_00 48:31

So uh it would be great if we could absolutely sensing and they want so many AI all together.

SPEAKER_01 48:38

People should take the algorithm and use it. That's that's why we publish it. That's why we publish it in the world. That's good.

SPEAKER_00 48:43

And that's actually is a good uh it's a good beginning for my next question because my next question was a little bit philosophical, but why do you think quantum is crucial for the world or will be crucial for the world?

SPEAKER_01 48:56

Why do I think it's crucial for the world? Okay, well, I think that's a good thing. That could be one example. That could be one example. If if if I wanted to be like completely quantum is the world, so you know, I mean the world runs on quantum mechanics, so it doesn't, you know. But uh but in terms of quantum quantum technologies themselves, it every I I think these technologies are neutral. But human ingenuity is amazing. And what and and for so from my perspective, the more um variable, the more flexible, the more capable technologies that we can put in front of humanity, people will take it and run with it. And the you know, the health health organization is one, the ability to simulate chemical systems and physical systems of quantum computer, if it could get us towards, you know, better superconductors or you know, nitrogen fixation or any one of these chemical, you know, chemical processes that's currently hard and expensive. There's so much that we can do for humanity. Uh there's so much that we can do in terms of even of hunger and weather and things like that that are, you know, and and it's just waiting for people to take the tools and and apply it. And that's why we need all hands on board. You know, not every, not every not every child is gonna become a quantum physicist. Yeah, every child's gonna go into quantum technologies, and that's that's necessary. There are lots of foreign jobs, absolutely. But those kids who have uh, you know, who who have an affinity towards it, go for it. It's all there, it's all in front of you. And who knows?

SPEAKER_00 50:12

As you said, sometimes we use technology that we don't even understand, right? Exactly. Uh today AI is allowing you already to, you know, code without really knowing how to code, right? Like prompt coding and produce application and website and so on. So who knows? Maybe in the future we will have basically we have a we have a box.

SPEAKER_01 50:31

We went box to work. Yeah. And uh uh if it's better than the previous box, then you find it.

SPEAKER_00 50:35

So cool. Okay, Ego, thank you so much. It was a pleasure to host you. So thank you so much for being here with us.

SPEAKER_01 50:44

It was a pleasure, you're welcome, and thank you so much for having me. So keep keep going.

SPEAKER_00 50:48

Thank you. That was Blond and Quantum. Thank you for joining me on this journey through the quantum business frontier. If you like the episode, please review it on Spotify or Apple Podcast and help more people discover the quantum world without needing to untangle the theoretical physics. See you next time. Unless the cat changes the time and first.