Alright, buckle up – this ones long and messy.Google just said their quantum computer solved a problem 13,000 times faster than the worlds fastest supercomputer. Unlike their last quantum supremacy claims, this one actually checks out and has real-world uses.They used their Willow chip with something called the Quantum Echoes algorithm – think sonar, but for molecules. They send in a signal, tweak it, then reverse it and listen for the echo that comes back.
Because of how quantum physics works, that echo gets amplified and can detect stuff classical computers can’t even register.With UC Berkeley, they tested it on molecules – one with 15 atoms, another with 28 – and it worked. The results matched what traditional NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) methods find, plus some bonus data. This could basically become a molecular ruler that measures atomic distances we couldn’t before.So what’s that mean for us?Right now – not much.
Some scientists are skeptical, since past quantum advantage moments didn’t hold up once classical computing caught up. But if this sticks, it could mean faster drug discovery, better materials, and major upgrades for batteries, catalysts, and all the behind-the-scenes tech that keeps the world running.But heres the part that we should be worried about: the Trump administration wants to buy into quantum computing companies – literally, own part of them. Theyre talking to IonQ, Rigetti, and D-Wave about taking equity stakes for $10M+ each.
Theyve already done this with Intel (10% stake) and MP Materials (15%).The official line is national security – gotta stay ahead of China. Fair enough. Quantum computers can break encryption – not just your password, but the kind protecting credit cards, government secrets, everything.Current encryption works because its too hard for normal computers to crack.
Quantum ones can blow through it using Shors algorithm, and the NSA has said straight up: if someone hostile gets there first, its a national security disaster.But letting the government buy into these companies is risky.First: conflict of interest. If they own part of the company, whos supposed to regulate it? History says they won’t.
See: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.Second: government ownership kills innovation. Bureaucrats are bad venture capitalists. They move slow, avoid risk, and care more about politics than progress.
Quantum startups need speed – not committees.Third: if the government owns quantum firms and also uses quantum tech for surveillance, what happens next?Theres already a strategy called harvest now, decrypt later. Hackers (and governments) are stealing encrypted data today, planning to decode it later once quantum computers can handle it. Everything from military intel to your DMs could be sitting in a vault waiting to be cracked.And its not just China doing that.
The NSAs been caught before – mass surveillance, limited programs that weren’t limited, all of it. Once theyve got working quantum machines, all that encrypted data theyve hoarded becomes readable.The U.S. is trying to get ahead with post-quantum cryptography – new encryption even quantum computers can’t break. In 2024, NIST announced three new standards.
Problem is, switching everything over will take a decade or more. That means a long window where quantum computers can break old encryption, but the new stuffs not fully in place.So we have a window where the government will have quantum computers that can break current encryption, but not everyone will have updated to quantum-safe encryption yet. Thats a surveillance wet dream.
And you can bet the intelligence agencies are already planning for it.But are there are better alternatives to the government taking equity stakes? Yep.How about grants with strict oversight and no ownership? You know, the traditional way government has funded research since World War II.
The Manhattan Project didn’t require the government to own General Electric. The space race didn’t require NASA to own Boeing. We funded the research, set clear goals, maintained oversight, and let the companies do what they do best.Or how about tax incentives for quantum research and development?
Let companies keep 100% of their equity but give them massive tax breaks for hitting specific milestones. This keeps the governments interests aligned with success without giving them voting power or board seats.Or heres a wild idea – maybe we invest in public universities doing quantum research instead of private companies. Fund university labs, train the next generation of quantum scientists, and keep the foundational research in the public domain.
Then private companies can commercialize the technology with government oversight and regulation.(I know, I know – this isn’t working very well right now – but the system is fixable if we have the will to fix it.)The broader context here is about technological sovereignty, sure. Just like we learned with semiconductors that relying on Taiwan for all our chips is a national security risk, quantum computing is the next battlefield. In recent years, governments around the world have pledged more than $20 billion toward quantum development, with China leading in public funding by a decisive margin.But the solution to China dumping money into quantum research isn’t for America to copy China’s state-controlled capitalism model.
Thats literally the opposite of what Republicans use to stand for. Were supposed to have free markets, private innovation, and government regulations that keep companies in check. Taking equity stakes in strategic industries is what China does.
Its what Russia does. It shouldn’t be what America does. The more equity stakes the US government takes, the more power it has over the citizens.
Google says they expect useful real-world applications for quantum computers within five years. Whether that timeline is realistic or just typical Silicon Valley optimism remains to be seen. But the race is definitely on.And heres the Freakonomics question we should be asking: what are the unintended consequences of the government owning pieces of the quantum computing industry?Maybe government ownership stifles innovation and we fall behind anyway.
Maybe it creates a cozy relationship between regulators and companies that leads to corruption. Maybe it gives the intelligence community unprecedented surveillance capabilities that get abused. Most likely – all of the above.The government has a terrible track record when it comes to new technology and civil liberties.
They told us the Patriot Act was temporary. They told us NSA surveillance was limited and targeted. They told us facial recognition would only be used to catch terrorists.
Every single time, they lied or mission-crept their way into mass surveillance.Why should we believe quantum computing will be any different?Sitting back and doing nothing while China dumps billions into quantum research would be stupid. But so is blindly handing over ownership stakes in game-changing technology to a government that has repeatedly demonstrated it can’t be trusted with that kind of power.