this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2026
67 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

81026 readers
4225 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
67
Why Haven’t Quantum Computers Factored 21 Yet? (hackaday.com)
submitted 1 day ago by technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

If you are to believe the glossy marketing campaigns about ‘quantum computing’, then we are on the cusp of a computing revolution, yet back in the real world things look a lot less dire. At least if you’re worried about quantum computers (QCs) breaking every single conventional encryption algorithm in use today, because at this point they cannot even factor 21 yet without cheating.

In the article by [Craig Gidney] the basic problem is explained, which comes down to simple exponentials. Specifically the number of quantum gates required to perform factoring increases exponentially, allowing QCs to factor 15 in 2001 with a total of 21 two-qubit entangling gates. Extrapolating from the used circuit, factoring 21 would require 2,405 gates, or 115 times more.

underlying article: https://algassert.com/post/2500

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The linked paper, “Replication of Quantum Factorisation Records with an 8-bit Home Computer, an Abacus, and a Dog” is also a great breakdown of how much the quantum factoring is more of a parlor trick and not practical for factoring RSA Keys, mainly since the prime factors are only a few bits off of each other and from the square root of the number being factored.

[–] lucullus@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 15 hours ago

We hypothesise that the production of fully entangled sheep is easy, given how hard it can be to disentangle their coats in the first place. The logistics of assembling the tens of thousands of sheep necessary to factorise RSA-2048 numbers is left as an open problem

Omg, I simply cannot! Thanks for brightening my day with this paper XD

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

a well trained dog outperforms current quantum-made calculations 👍🥳

[–] MetalSlugX@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Seriously recommend this. I saw it a while back and found it highly informative.

The talk is on YT... Id link but at work atm