The article is very long and therefore I leave you a simple summary of ChatGPT.

In any case, the issues are that Italy is putting some regulations in favor of quantum but is behind France, which however already has its own company on quantum. So to recover Italy should rely on other companies (9 of the top 10 in the world are American) but there is obviously the conflict with Europe. And American companies are interested in Italy for its scientists and capabilities.

Europe which is fortunately moving, and has allocated 11 billion, which however is little compared to the USA and China (where there are already 12 thousand km of quantum networks).

But regulations transformed into laws in Italy and greater European investments would be needed, if we don’t want this train to be all-American too (even if it seems to me that the locomotive already has a Stars and Stripes flag by now).

Side note/PR: D Wave has launched a series of conferences and seminars on quantum in Italy, so in short, they are moving, just don’t let them escape =D D-Wave Hosts Series of Seminars to Expand Quantum Computing Education in Italy

PS: dwave are not classical quantum computers with logic gates but more specialized (quantum anealing), which do fewer things, have fewer errors, are less powerful but simpler, “”a kind of asic””.

Summary

  • US companies D-Wave e IonQ they chose Italy (Lake Como area) to create a quantum computing research hub called Q-Alliance.
    Source: https://www.wired.it/article/quantum-computing-hub-italia-d-wave-ionq-strategia-europa-costi/

  • The hub will not just be commercial: it will offer direct access to quantum cloud for startups and researchers.

  • Why Italy?

    • Academic and research ecosystem considered competitive
    • Availability for public-private collaborations
    • National strategy on quantum published by the government on July 31, 2024 with 33 actions planned.
  • The Italian strategy foresees ~200 million €/year for 5 years per:

    • research
    • infrastructure
    • industrial incentives
    • filiera hardware/quantum chip
  • Conflict with Brussels:

    • The EU Commission wants limit European funds to “European” companies
    • This hinders the participation of D-Wave and IonQ
    • The reason is the “technological sovereignty” european
  • D-Wave argues that excluding US companies means missing out on key technologies:

    • It is the only commercial company with systems quantum annealing already mature
  • Cost factor:

    • For 51% of companies the cost is the main obstacle to adoption
    • A pilot project costs money 300–600 thousand dollars
    • Access to a quantum system can cost money hundreds of thousands up to millions of dollars per year
  • Market forecast:

    • >$10 billion of global public funds over the next 3-5 years
    • Potential economic impact $450–850 billion by 2040
  • In summary:

    • Italy can become a bridge between the USA and the EU in quantum
    • But it is in the midst of a geopolitical dispute between opening (USA) e strategic autonomy (EU)

https://www.wired.it/article/quantum-computing-hub-italia-d-wave-ionq-strategia-europa-costi/

Posted by nohup_me

Share.

3 Comments

  1. Secondo me il tuo pappagallo stocastico ha lasciato fuori un dettaglio importante:

    “La regia del piano dovrebbe essere affidata a un Polo nazionale della quantistica (dove siedono enti pubblici e aziende). Secondo gli estensori del piano, l’Italia dovrebbe investire 200 milioni all’anno per un quinquennio per far decollare le sue ambizioni nel quantum computing e avvicinarsi alla quota dove volano oggi paesi come la Francia e la Germania (che hanno varato nel 2021 le loro strategie, rispettivamente con 1,8 e 2,5 miliardi di impegni) o la Spagna (arrivata nel 2025 con un piano da 800 milioni).”

    ~~Mi piace che Wired abbia il buon gusto di dire “avvicinarsi alla quota” quando avrebbe dovuto dire che investiamo meno di un decimo della Germania, un quarto della Spagna.~~

    Edit: come giustamente mi fanno notare, ho sbagliato ad interpretare le cifre: quelle riportare per gli altri paesi sono investimenti totali, mentre quelli discussi sono i possibili investimenti annuali italiani, che se confermati fanno effettivamente una cifra simile a quella degli altri paesi.

  2. Ma io mi chiedo, sta cazzo di sovranità tecnologica, non si può ottenere una volta che la tecnologia esiste e funziona? Possiamo farlo già con i social e i motori di ricerca. Banniamo quelli americani e cinesi e facciamone di europei. Tecnologie vecchie di 10 e 40 anni rispettivamente che portano un fottio di soldi.

    Io non capisco lo stato che butta soldi in ricerca privata per cose la cui utilità pubblica non è ancora nota.