Microsoft Receives Quantum Computing Patent
Microsoft filed a patent for "quantum computational systems" back in 2009 and received confirmation by the USPTO yesterday.
What makes this patent interesting is not just the fact that Microsoft has begun covering its bases in quantum computing, which gives this field much more credibility, but its general nature to improve on "prior art" in topological quantum computing. Without a deep dive into quantum computing itself, much of the content covered by patent is confusing enough to make your head spin, but it is obvious that Microsoft is targeting quantum computing functionality in wide range of applications.
The Microsoft patent refers to specific quantum computing devices, including quantum computers, quantum cryptography systems, quantum information processing systems, quantum storage media, and special purpose quantum simulators, all of which are covered in this patent by themselves and in combination with traditional computing systems. Microsoft spends quite a bit of time on cryptography systems and states that "cryptography also would be revolutionized" if computers could "exploit quantum mechanical superpositions".
In a cryptography application, Microsoft explains that "respective braids that correspond to the plain text and the encryption key may be defined. The key braid may be applied to the plain-text braid to generate an encrypted-text braid. To decrypt the encrypted text, the key braid may be applied to the encrypted text braid to reestablish the plain-text braid." It is generally believed that quantum computing systems could deliver cryptography applications that are far more secure than today's solutions
- Kingston Releases SSDNow V200 Series SSDs
- Skyrim Developer Says PC Development is a Headache
- EA President Confirms There Will Be a Battlefield 4
- ARM Reveals 8-Core GPU For Superphones
- Steam's Database Hacked, Info Possibly Stolen
- Swiftech Releases H2O-x20 Edge HD Liquid Cooling Kits
- Happy Birthday Firefox, You're Now 7 Years Old!
- Nvidia Releases New Battlefield 3, Skyrim Beta Drivers
- Desktop Vendors Not Keen on Using Chrome OS
- Deals Nov 11: Dell Inspiron 15 Core i3 2.53GHz $349
- Estonian Clickjacking Ring Totally Busted
- OCZ reveals the PC Power & Cooling Silencer Mk III Series PSUs
- Mathematicians Calculate 10 Trillion Digits of Pi With Xeons
- Star Trek Online Going Free-to-Play in January 2012
- The $79 Kindle Costs Amazon $84 to Make
- XFX adds 1,000+ Watt PSUs to Its ProSeries
- NEC Has a Huge 52-inch Tablet On Wheels
- 3 Ways That Windows is Smarter With Power
The fact that you can patent something before its been developed and works is sickening. The whole patent system is inefficient and is hurting the consumer.
The fact that you can patent something before its been developed and works is sickening. The whole patent system is inefficient and is hurting the consumer.
I agree, but hopefully this will destroy Linux and Mac OS
This is pathetic. Patents are the best way to hinder innovation.
@ eno5 - That would not be your same attitude if someone stole or copied something you are working on. If anything, this helps innovation by setting a standard base to work from, instead of multiple people working on the same process in different ways to get the same results.
Microsoft are not actively engaged in producing working quantum computing devices. They never will be.
Are research students / groups the world over now more likely to put in years of effort to realise a technolgy that microsoft already has the patents for or are they more likely to just think 'f**k it dude, let's go bowling'?
I agree, but hopefully this will destroy Linux and Mac OS
How is Linux and Mac OS relevant to quantum computing? What sets apart quantum computing from standard computers in mainly transistors (and the fact that quantum computers use quantum mechanic principles).
I wonder if I can patent the patent process... this way, I can get a royalty on any one wishing to apply for a nonsense patent and not feel so bad when I read money grabs like this. It's sick to think this kind of patent system exists!
How is Linux and Mac OS relevant to quantum computing? What sets apart quantum computing from standard computers in mainly transistors (and the fact that quantum computers use quantum mechanic principles).
They're not, because that MS patent will keep them away from it for good.
Wow, lots of Linux fanboys on Tom's recently! What are you doing here?
Microsoft are not actively engaged in producing working quantum computing devices. They never will be. Are research students / groups the world over now more likely to put in years of effort to realise a technolgy that microsoft already has the patents for or are they more likely to just think 'f**k it dude, let's go bowling'?
But they will make an OS to work with them. And of course they don't want some open source BS to steal their profits! Besides, research WILL be done, whether they want it or not; Asia, or example, doesn't care about patents and copyrights at all, 90% of all software here is pirated. And it gets work done
Interesting, especially seeing as I work along side some of the biggest minds in quantum computing.
They're not, because that MS patent will keep them away from it for good.Wow, lots of Linux fanboys on Tom's recently! What are you doing here? Core 2 Duo is enough for toying with your OS, you don't need Tom's content
I know MacOS is annoying, but give open source programs their due! Without open source stuff we'd be in a pretty shitty world...and Linux does have its advantages.
Besides, research WILL be done, whether they want it or not; Asia, for example, doesn't care about patents and copyrights at all, 90% of all software here is pirated. And it gets work done
+10^6
Though the fact that software is pirated so much lets PC game make devs lame excuses...
They're not, because that MS patent will keep them away from it for good.Wow, lots of Linux fanboys on Tom's recently! What are you doing here? Core 2 Duo is enough for toying with your OS, you don't need Tom's content But they will make an OS to work with them. And of course they don't want some open source BS to steal their profits! Besides, research WILL be done, whether they want it or not; Asia, or example, doesn't care about patents and copyrights at all, 90% of all software here is pirated. And it gets work done
Never used Linux bro. The irony here is that your a Windows fanboy, so any comment that you refer to someone else as a Linux fanboy is invalid and void. Now, get of your computer before your mommy finds you saying bad things in the internet.
You obviously never went to school to learn proper grammar. YOU'RE not your.
And Linux as a desktop OS will never breach 5% market share, less it can barely hit 2%.
Problem with open source for the general consumer? There's a bunch of nerds who make 400 different variations of the SAME THING and think that's what is going to drive people to using the product.
I've heard many times from people trying to get into Linux that the worst experience was when they go into a forum to ask for beginners help and they're pretty much told to screw off and they shouldn't be playing with it if they don't know it.
The community is a bunch of pissed off nerds who hate MS, yet they can't all band together to create a decent OS for a general user.
Never used Linux bro. The irony here is that your a Windows fanboy, so any comment that you refer to someone else as a Linux fanboy is invalid and void. Now, get of your computer before your mommy finds you saying bad things in the internet.
I could advise the same to you... what a pathetic ruse
I know MacOS is annoying, but give open source programs their due! Without open source stuff we'd be in a pretty shitty world...and Linux does have its advantages.
+10^6
Though the fact that software is pirated so much lets PC game make devs lame excuses...
Open source on Windows = WIN. Open source on Linux = FAIL. Even Firefox is half-assed there. Linux is cool, I work with it all the time, but keep it away from home desktops.
You obviously never went to school to learn proper grammar. YOU'RE not your.And Linux as a desktop OS will never breach 5% market share, less it can barely hit 2%.Problem with open source for the general consumer? There's a bunch of nerds who make 400 different variations of the SAME THING and think that's what is going to drive people to using the product.I've heard many times from people trying to get into Linux that the worst experience was when they go into a forum to ask for beginners help and they're pretty much told to screw off and they shouldn't be playing with it if they don't know it.The community is a bunch of pissed off nerds who hate MS, yet they can't all band together to create a decent OS for a general user.
You sound mad, my friend. This is the internet. If it pisses you off that people make grammatical mistakes, you do not belong here. If you are a general user, Windows is fine for you. No one is forcing you into Linux. I personally do not use Linux as it doesn't work well with all hardware, and that Windows is enough for me. Why switch? Depending on what you are finding difficult, you can simple do a quick Google search on the topic or even look up a beginner's guide for Linux. What I find annoying is that Linux-as you claim-are a bunch of MS hating nerds (if you are implying "nerd" is an insult, I question why you are here), yet it seems as though the Windows community is becoming just as shallow and obnoxious as the Linux community.
You obviously never went to school to learn proper grammar. YOU'RE not your.
And Linux as a desktop OS will never breach 5% market share, less it can barely hit 2%.
Problem with open source for the general consumer? There's a bunch of nerds who make 400 different variations of the SAME THING and think that's what is going to drive people to using the product.
I've heard many times from people trying to get into Linux that the worst experience was when they go into a forum to ask for beginners help and they're pretty much told to screw off and they shouldn't be playing with it if they don't know it.
The community is a bunch of pissed off nerds who hate MS, yet they can't all band together to create a decent OS for a general user.
As much as I disrespect Linux for different things, I've actually never witnessed a problem with beginners being flamed. And I check forums a lot, because... well, because it's Linux
And they actually put it as an advantage... 400 distros, find the one you like
And I totally agree about a bunch of pissed off nerds. The people who've created the kernel and most of the OS are really skilled, but the rest of this "community" are a bunch of haters and I've seen too many stupid posters asking "You use WINDOWS? So how often does it BSOD on you?" I mean, if they're that outdated with that info and don't want to pay, maybe they should just pirate Windows 7 and check if it's really THAT bad
The fact that you can patent something before its been developed and works is sickening. The whole patent system is inefficient and is hurting the consumer.
It might look ridiculous now ,but wouldn't it be an epic move for microsoft if it does really does profit them half a century later?
Back to the topic, quantum cryptography is really needed sometime soon, Sony and Steam can testify to that, if MS can take this patent and run it full pelt through their R&D labs with a couple of billion dollars behind it we may very well have a secure future for everyone.
Isn't that something to be thankful for?
Apparently not, this has now decended into a bitter fanboi war, grow up, all of you.
I agree, but hopefully this will destroy Linux and Mac OS
Destroying the Monopoly of iShit is fine, but when you try to "Destroy" Linux you will be destroying a HUGE server platform & open-source medium that helped build the internet & home computer. THINK before you spew your jargon.
Destroying the Monopoly of iShit is fine, but when you try to "Destroy" Linux you will be destroying a HUGE server platform & open-source medium that helped build the internet & home computer. THINK before you spew your jargon.
Well.. not really. Linux is cool and all, but keep it away from home desktop and don't DARE to make ANY demands of hardware manufacturers. Don't wanna pay - why should they develop a driver for your OS?
Android OS is based on the Linux kernel, not to mention Linux is found throughout many-if not majority-of supercomputers and servers.
So, logistically speaking, no Linux=No Android OS, which I believe you prefer compared to iOS or any other mobile OS. So if Linux did not exist, the mobile market, as well as the face of computing, would differ from what we see now. So yes, Linux is important and has a much larger role in the market than the desktop market.
Back to the topic, quantum cryptography is really needed sometime soon, Sony and Steam can testify to that, if MS can take this patent and run it full pelt through their R&D labs with a couple of billion dollars behind it we may very well have a secure future for everyone.Isn't that something to be thankful for?Apparently not, this has now decended into a bitter fanboi war, grow up, all of you.
It's only a fanboy war if there are two or more sides which favor only one product/brand, which isn't the case here
Android OS is based on the Linux kernel, not to mention Linux is found throughout many-if not majority-of supercomputers and servers.
So, logistically speaking, no Linux=No Android OS, which I believe you prefer compared to iOS or any other mobile OS. So if Linux did not exist, the mobile market, as well as the face of computing, would differ from what we see now. So yes, Linux is important and has a much larger role in the market than the desktop market.
I actually don't care for Android. I'd prefer it over iOS, but Symbian was the best mobile OS experience for me, touch screen or not. And I have yet to try WP 7.5... if it lets me use hardware to the max and has every function I need inbuilt so I don't need crApps, I'd choose that over Android.
And I don't give about supercomputers (most of what they do on them is big scale nuclear war result simulations) and servers can run on Windows just fine, not my problem.
If microsoft adopted quantum computing they'd have to completely redesign windows.
I'm wondering how they have defined those "braids" in patent application. If worded correctly MS could hold patent for any type of encryption done on quantum computers.
I could have sworn that IBM had a few patents for this back in the mid/late 90s when quantum computing was getting to be a bit more than just theoretical. I smell a fight in 10-20 years, maybe the US patent office will be fixed by then.
So how do you ctrl-alt-delete a quantum computer? I bet MS knows.
what I want to know is when are quantum computers going to be able to begin modifying the laws of physics and space and time?
What do you mean it doesn't support Sandy Bridge IGP properly? It's your own fault you're using such modern fancy hardware!
Does Microsoft supports the Sandy Bridge IGP? No, Intel does. So don't blame linux.
And I don't give about supercomputers (most of what they do on them is big scale nuclear war result simulations) and servers can run on Windows just fine, not my problem.
Yep servers can run on windows just more unreliable and slower. There's a reason why most web servers, dns servers,... are unix/linux based.
Don't wanna pay - why should they develop a driver for your OS?
Since when does a OS developers pay to the hardware manufacturers to have drivers developed for their system?
Apply an encrytion key to a plain text to get an encrypted text. Sounds like common knowledge. Now apply a key braid to a plain braid to get an encrypted braid. WTF.
Since when does a OS developers pay to the hardware manufacturers to have drivers developed for their system?
Since like ever.