IBM 'more certain' of new quantum computer by 2029
June 10 (UPI) -- IBM on Tuesday revealed its map to the development of its large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer styled as "Quantum Starling."
The Quantum Starling, to be built at IBM headquarters in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., will be part of IBM's new Quantum Nighthawk processor set for release later this year.
"IBM is charting the next frontier in quantum computing," IBM Chairman and CEO Arvind Krishna said Tuesday.
The Nighthawk is set to replace the Quantum Heron processor, the company said in a blog post. The Nighthawk, meanwhile, runs at 5,000 gates like the Heron with plans to boost it to 15,000 gates within the next three years.
A quantum gate is a basic operation on a qubit, the basic unit of quantum information.
IBM officials say the Nighthawk charts the first viable path toward a system projected to run 20,000 times more operations than quantum computers by today's standard.
"Our expertise across mathematics, physics, and engineering is paving the way for a large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer -- one that will solve real-world challenges and unlock immense possibilities for business," Krishna added.
"Unlocking the full promise of quantum computing will require a device capable of running larger, deeper circuits with hundreds of millions of gates operating on hundreds of qubits, at least," the company blog post said.
"More than that, it will require a device capable of correcting errors and preventing them from spreading throughout the system."
It added that it will require a fault-tolerant quantum computer. Fault tolerance is a system's ability to correct and act with known errors.
This follows other tech companies in the quantum race such as Google's "Willow," the quantum chip Majorana 1 by Microsoft and the "Ocelot" chip from Amazon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Big Tech Is Finally Losing
It's easy to miss it amid the nonstop avalanche of news, but we are on the cusp of a technology revolution — one that could usher in an entirely new information landscape. After 30 years of shockingly few regulatory restraints, America's tech giants were beginning to operate almost like wrecking balls, slamming their weight into industry after industry and taking them out one after another. Boom. Uber crushed the taxi limousine business. Boom. Facebook toppled the news business. Boom. Amazon wiped out numerous small retailers. Finally, our courts are beginning to push back. In the past two months, courts have forced Apple to end its usurious tax on purchases made through apps on its phones, ruled that Google had abused its online ad monopoly and considered what consequences to impose on Google for what they concluded was an illegal dominance of the search market. A court has heard arguments about why Meta, which runs Facebook, should be forced to spin off popular rivals Instagram and WhatsApp, and allowed a case to proceed that alleges Amazon has abused its monopoly. Reining in Big Tech appears to be one of the few bipartisan policies that has spanned the Biden and Trump administrations, despite the tech titans' attempts to curry favor with the new president. Taken together, these developments could end years of stagnation and usher in more competition, smaller companies and better services. I personally can't wait for competition in the search market — as Google results have been getting worse, by many estimates, including my own. I'm tired of sifting through Google's increasingly cluttered and irrelevant search results, searching in vain for the latest news and instead finding only Reddit posts. I want a search engine for shopping that trawls the web for the best merchandise rather than just pulling from the sites that list items with Google. I want a search engine that doesn't allow ads to masquerade as reviews. I want a search engine that lets me control the amount of artificial intelligence summaries in my results. And there are probably even cooler search products that a new generation of search entrepreneurs will dream up. Google argues that A.I. search engines like Perplexity are already providing competition in the market. That is a mirage. As the judge in the Google antitrust case has described, none of Google's rivals can compete with it, given how much Google knows about what websites users click and stay on versus those they click and bounce from. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
The Verge
an hour ago
- The Verge
Moto Tag finally gets precise UWB location tracking
Promised way back in June 2024, the Moto Tag location tracker is finally rolling out UWB support via a firmware update. That makes it the first tracker on Google's Find Hub network to support ultra-wideband tracking, which is superior to Bluetooth since it uses distance and directional arrows to guide owners with compatible phones to their lost tags. To update your Moto Tag you'll need the 01.00.073.10-release of the Moto Tag app from the Play Store. You can then apply the 2.0.93 firmware with UWB support. You'll also need a modern Android phone that supports UWB, which includes newer Galaxy and Pixel flagships. We can't blame Motorola for the delay here, since Google's Find Hub location network (previously called Find My Device) only recently lit up with UWB support. Samsung's network for its SmartTags has supported UWB since launch in 2020, while Apple's network for AirTags has supported it since launch in 2021. My colleague Dom recently put Google's location tracking network to the test, pitting a number of trackers, including the Moto Tag and Apple AirTag, against each other. It's worth a read to understand the tradeoffs in privacy and precision.
Android Authority
3 hours ago
- Android Authority
AOSP isn't dead, but Google just landed a huge blow to custom ROM developers
Mishaal Rahman / Android Authority TL;DR Google has made it harder to build custom Android ROMs for Pixel phones by omitting their device trees and driver binaries from the latest AOSP release. The company says this is because it's shifting its AOSP reference target from Pixel hardware to a virtual device called 'Cuttlefish' to be more neutral. While Google insists AOSP isn't going away, developers must now reverse-engineer changes, making the process for supporting Pixel devices more difficult. Earlier this year, Google announced it would develop the Android OS fully in private to simplify its development process. By focusing its efforts on a single internal branch, Google aimed to streamline work that was previously split. The news initially spooked some in the Android development community, but the controversy quickly subsided. The impact was minimal, as Google was already developing most of Android behind closed doors and promised that source code releases would continue. Now, however, a recent omission from Google has rekindled fears that the company might stop sharing source code for new Android releases, though Google has stated these concerns are unfounded. As promised, Google published the source code for Android 16 this week, allowing independent developers to compile their own builds of the new operating system. This source code was uploaded to the Android Open Source Project (AOSP), as usual, under the permissive Apache 2.0 license. However, multiple developers quickly noticed a glaring omission from the Android 16 source code release: the device trees for Pixel devices were missing. Google also failed to upload new driver binaries for each Pixel device and released the kernel source code with a squashed commit history. Since Google has shared the device trees, driver binaries, and full kernel source code commit history for years, its omission in this week's release was concerning. These omissions led some to speculate this week that Google was taking the first step in a plan to discontinue AOSP. In response, Google's VP and GM of Android Platform, Seang Chau, refuted these claims. In a post on X, he addressed the speculation, stating that 'AOSP is NOT going away.' Mishaal Rahman / Android Authority He also confirmed the omission of Pixel device trees is intentional, stating that 'AOSP needs a reference target that is flexible, configurable, and affordable — independent of any particular hardware, including those from Google.' Instead of supporting AOSP builds on Pixel devices, Google will support the virtual Android device 'Cuttlefish' as its reference target. Cuttlefish runs on PCs, allowing Google and platform developers to test new hardware features. Google will also continue to support GSI targets, which are generic system images that can be installed on nearly any Android device. On one hand, this logic is sound. Google wants to move away from using Pixels as the AOSP reference device and is making changes to that effect. As Seang Chau notes, 'AOSP was built on the foundation of being an open platform for device implementations, SoC vendors, and instruction set architectures.' In that regard, Cuttlefish is a more appropriate reference target because it isn't a heavily customized piece of consumer hardware like a Pixel phone. However, since Cuttlefish is a virtual device, it can only simulate how hardware features behave, making it an imperfect reference in some ways. The more significant issue, however, is the impact this decision will have on developers who build custom ROMs — the community term for hobbyist forks of AOSP. Nolen Johnson, a long-time contributor and reviewer for the LineageOS project, says the process of building these ROMs for Pixel phones will become 'painful' moving forward. Previously, Google made it simple for developers to build AOSP for Pixel devices, but that support is now gone. Developers simply had to 'pull the configurations [that] Google created,' add their customizations, and then build. Now, however, they will need to take the old device trees that Google released for Android 15 and 'blindly guess and reverse engineer from the prebuilt [binaries] what changes are needed each month.' This is because making a full Android build for a device — not just a GSI — requires a device tree. This is a 'collection of configuration files that define the hardware layout, peripherals, proprietary file listings, and other details for a specific device, allowing the build system to build a proper image for that device.' While Google previously handled this work, developers must now create their own device trees without access to the necessary proprietary source code. Furthermore, Google's decision to squash the kernel source code's commit history also hinders custom development. The Pixel's kernel source code was often used as a 'reference point for other devices to take features, bug fixes, and security patches from,' but with the history now reduced to a single commit, this is no longer feasible. While Google is under no obligation to release device trees, provide driver binaries, or share the full kernel commit history (in fact, it's one of the few device makers to do these things), it has done so for years. The company's reason for doing so was because the Pixel was treated as a reference platform for AOSP, so developers needed an easy way to build for it. Google's decision to now discontinue the Pixel as an AOSP reference device is unfortunate, as it has pulled the rug from under developers like the teams at LineageOS and GrapheneOS who build Android for Pixel devices. These developers will still be able to build AOSP for Pixel devices, but it will now be more difficult and painful to do so than before. Got a tip? Talk to us! Email our staff at Email our staff at news@ . You can stay anonymous or get credit for the info, it's your choice.
