Are the Promises of Quantum Computing Misleading?
The other day, just before my flight, I picked up a special issue of Harvard Business Review (HBR) titled "The Year in Tech, 2025."
Like many of you, I was excited about the possibility of finding something about quantum computing (QC) and its potential "to transform nearly every industry in today's world."
Well… do you know how many articles were about quantum computing?
None!
And, do you know how many times they mentioned quantum computing?
Not even once!
For those of us who spend our days thinking about QC, this is disappointing.
It raises a tough question:
Is quantum computing truly important, or are we just delusional?
Is it just useful for Michio Kaku to make more money selling books, rather than for practical applications?
What Are We Getting Wrong?
As I have emphasized in previous posts, I think that one major issue is the lack of honest interaction with end users.
Not to try to sell them something, but to really listen to them!
For example, in finance, most quants don’t care about QC—and it seems not much has been done to change that (see my post True: Most Quants Don't Care about Quantum!).
The HBR edition I bought had an article titled "What is Responsible Computing?" that struck me as particularly relevant to this discussion.
Let me quote part of their conclusion:
"Firms can use the responsible computing framework to make their IT more green, ethical, trustworthy, and sustainable.
The following pillars can help you become a responsible computing provider: ..."
Here are two of those pillars:
1. "Assess and track energy sources, energy use related to cooling, and water usage."
If quantum computers are expected to consume significantly less energy than classical computers for certain computations, why isn’t this being promoted as a key selling point?
With AI’s energy consumption continuing to rise, shouldn’t we be presenting QC as a more sustainable alternative to classical computing?
Even if not yet practical, it could at least serve as a compelling investment narrative.
2. "Understand the ethical, legal, and social responsibility of processing and storing data."
Since quantum communication has been shown to be more secure than classical communication, why isn’t this part of the selling proposition for quantum technologies?
These are two clear areas where QC could outperform classical computing, yet we rarely hear them emphasized in public discussions (particularly the first one).
Maybe we should stop talking about quantum speedups over classical computers and start positioning QC from a more practical perspective:
✘ Computational acceleration.
✓ Energy efficiency.
✓ Stronger security.
Would shifting the conversation in this direction make QC adoption more appealing to investors and industries?
Want to dive deeper? My eBook is a great place to start → https://www.ozatp.com/qaf
