Lodewijk andré de la porte <[1]l@odewijk.nl> wrote:
   > The massive quantum computer has unpredictable power consumption.
   Lee Azzarello <[2]lee@guardianproject.info> wrote:
   > I guess inventing new math to break crypto has some physics problems.
   these comments has me contemplating what a large-scale networked
   quantum computer installation would involve.. and to what extent the
   image of racks of servers may note correlate with the computing
   technology inside the boxes, or in some percentage of the data centre.
   in other words- how would a quantum installation differ from the
   classical computer systems of the last many decades- would they be of
   yet another smaller scale or would an installation inherently be
   enormous. what if the data centre was all quantum computing in terms of
   the data throughput - do these numbers correlate or are different
   approaches to security calculations required
   is it possible that a 'computer within a computer' could exist, such
   that a quantum chip could be embedded and use a classical electronic
   based system, that is, some form of stealth or hidden computing that
   occurs in a parallel hidden framework, including for networking data.
   could ethernet or fibre channel be used or would it need to be
   different, say tuned resonant circuits computing in other
   dimensionality.
   would such an installation be possible and be manageable via secondary,
   zoned interface, and not noticeable, especially if sealed into
   processors or chips and thus tamper- and inspection-proof.  to what
   extent may the data centre be a Spruce Goose or Glomar Explorer,
   providing conventional 'economies-of-scale' development for computing
   that is beyond this present-day technological situation.
   the idea that the NSA would field an early quantum computer in such a
   situation seems unlikely. especially if considering the scale issue
   whereby early computing starts large and shrinks down, thus ENIAC or
   other room or warehouse sized earlier computer installations of newly
   developing technology eventually moving into transistor and integrated
   circuit (IC) fabrications, personal computing, server boxes instead of
   tape-storage mainframes, and now cellphones compared to peak computing
   power thirty or more years earlier.
   would quantum computers require different storage technology, for
   instance, or could they rely on today's storage- or would it need to be
   formatted differently. and given massive parallelism and the nature of
   supercomputers to be custom programmed and time-shared by various
   projects, could such a quantum device exist nested in another system
   yet be linked in parallel to make a massive installation, and then be
   called upon for particular vexing tasks versus number crunching or data
   processing that can effectively be managed via existing tech, such as
   voice recognition or text analysis in particular modeling approaches.
   i wonder if - and perhaps it is entirely wrong-minded - in some way --
   besides the issue of batteries as a limit upon scale and usability of
   computing resources, that if the electron itself is a false-limit and
   there could be smaller particle flows harnessed via destabilizing the
   natural equilibrium and thus the imbalance forces movement of charge at
   a smaller scale or within a different kind of circuitry that could be
   nested inside a larger electronic installation. what if a quantum
   computer would be equivalent to a tiny unmarked IC on a circuitboard
   and yet would it require access to the same components of existing
   computer architectures today or could it operate beyond or outside
   this, say as a connectable linked quantum processor networked into
   parallelism, for calculations alone.
   would a quantum computer installation be humongous or could a
   sufficiently developed (say, over the last 50 years) quantum computer
   be the size of a PC today yet wield teraflop or beyond capacity. what
   would be a telltale sign of such computing. could it involve strange or
   aberrant electronic or electrical interference or events, is it
   possible that the flow of electrons may interfere with such computation
   or that such a computer may need to be isolated else it could force
   strange current backwards, beyond diode barricades even, given
   weirdness of the physics. would the power draw be the same or more or
   less. would existing parallel software approaches even be viable within
   such a context or is it reliant upon assumptions that no longer apply
   if one or more foundations of existing computer architectures are
   changed or made unnecessary. is a quantum computer only quantum in some
   senses, such as processing, and this stops at I/O or other supposed
   'motherboard' interactions, or would the entire circuit be changed.
   could there be hybrids where both co-exist, or like questioned, if one
   computing system could be embedded within another, via protected
   boundary?  (this is already assumed for tech today, though seemingly in
   the same realm of technology in the mundane sense, like masquerade
   processing or other mystery functionality)
   the assumption i think is most likely if such a scenario existed would
   be that any such quantum technology would be highly advanced from the
   rudimentary first stages it exists today in the commercial realm, and
   would be possible to deploy and crack crypto en masse and that there is
   not symmetry between AES256 and this giant installation- built just for
   that- and instead whatever capacity were to exist it would be so far
   beyond the requirements of existing crypto as to provide decades of
   headroom for more data crunching atop what exists to be parsed and
   analyzed, catalogued, and stored in terms of record keeping. that it
   would involve 'big picture' data modeling of the state itself in its
   many and various dimensions as they are correlated- or perhaps that is
   only the domain of the underground data centres, who knows.
   in other words: can the assumption be made that the image of rows upon
   rows of computing servers equal 'traditional computing power' or might
   they function as the signage for conventional technology when stealth
   computing infrastructure could be within the mystery boxes networked
   and sparking. is it conventional for such feedback upon large scale
   installations or could such aberrations or anomalies indicate other
   possibilities, as commented. is there some truth to the irreverence, in
   that would anyone in the public know or be able to know, or even in
   government or private service - unless vetted and kept out of the
   mainstream, and its venue of conventional technological development.
   could quantum computing exist over the existing internet and be
   unrecognized or would it require its own parallel infrastructure. would
   the equivalent of a non-stealth advanced quantum computer installation
   be at the same scale or, if unhidden, potentially much smaller, else
   indicate anything if the existing installation was entirely or a large
   percentage of quantum computers. what would it mean for crypto, for
   instance. would emissions or anything else provide indication of
   quantum versus traditional computing architectures, via escaped
   signature forms of data structuring tuned into remotely. what would it
   mean, otherwise.
   (i put these things here at the bottom to make space for the post,
   there is no extra line break at the end, so the list footer often
   crunches the last line of text. even if fixed/added i may include an
   ASCII character anyway, for issues of symbolism as it relates to code
   and processing)
   x[p]

References

   1. mailto:l@odewijk.nl
   2. mailto:lee@guardianproject.info