Australia to rethink its position as a global quantum leader
Last century, Australia was an international trailblazer in quantum computing. Now we are falling behind the rest of the world. So what can we do about it?
If Australia is to reinstate its position as a global leader in quantum technology, a clear quantum strategy, strong political leadership, and a focus on policy and public investment is needed, according to a new report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).
The report compiled by ASPI’s International Cyber Policy Centre (ICPC), An Australian strategy for the quantum revolution, argues countries with a substantial quantum portfolio will dominate the information processing space in the coming decades. And Australia is lagging behind.
Major findings of the report were discussed by coauthors and quantum researchers, Dr Simon Devitt and Dr Peter Rohde from the University of Technology Sydney, Professor Gavin Brennen from Macquarie University and Dr Tara Roberson from the University of Queensland, at an ICPC forum in Canberra last week.
Dr Devitt warns Australia is at risk of being crowded out globally,if we don't match the level of sovereign investment in quantum programs by other OECD nations.
“We still have the talent here, but we don't have the capital,” he says.
“And it's becoming harder and harder for us to compete, when corporations are pilfering talent left right and centre from Australia,”
"We've just got to take it to the next order of magnitude," he says. "If the rest of the world is going to increase [quantum] funding by a factor of 10 or 100, we've got to increase it by a factor of 10 or 100."
The first and foremost long-term goal is that we can't put ourselves in a position where we end up becoming purely a client state.
Dr Peter Rohde
UTS Centre for Quantum Software and Information
Emerging quantum technologies will transform many of our future industries, from healthcare and finance to communications and logistics.
Quantum cryptography for instance, creates encrypted codes that can’t even be broken by a quantum computer - a boon for the military and security sectors.
But while the future benefits are huge, Dr Peter Rohde warns Australia also needs the capabilities to manage potential threats.
"It's not just about 'We want to develop this technology and have it'," he says. "We also need to be mindful of who we don't want to have it,"
"The first and foremost long-term goal is that we can't put ourselves in a position where we end up becoming purely a client state,"
"If you think of our reliance on silicon chips at the moment, we're completely dependent upon others,"
"[We need to] to position ourselves so that we're producing things and selling them to others, rather than licensing a cloud subscription service from a future quantum cloud provider,"
"Ultimately, economics is what determines strategic strength."
ASPI’s International Cyber Policy Centre is urging senior policy makers to establish a national consolidated strategy to prepare Australia for the quantum revolution.
WATCH THE FORUM : An Australian Strategy for the Quantum Revolution, presented by the ASPI International Cyber Policy Centre
00:03
[Music]
00:06
my name is daniel cave and i'm the
00:07
deputy director of aspie's international
00:09
cyber policy
00:11
center which now totals around 30 people
00:13
working across
00:14
cyber critical and emerging tech foreign
00:16
interference info ops and disinformation
00:18
issues
00:19
uh thank you very much for joining us
00:21
for the launch of our project a new
00:22
report
00:23
and australian strategy for the quantum
00:25
revolution and for the authors of the
00:26
report we'll introduce
00:28
uh in a little bit for flying down uh
00:31
here to join us and for tara online is
00:33
um i think skyping in from queensland
00:36
um before we begin the proceedings i'd
00:38
like to acknowledge and pay respect to
00:40
the traditional owners of the land on
00:41
which we're currently sitting
00:42
another wall peoples it is upon their
00:45
and ancestral lands that the australian
00:46
strategic policy institute is built
00:49
uh and as we share our own knowledge
00:50
with each other today may we also
00:53
pay respect to the long history of
00:54
knowledge sharing and the enduring
00:55
traditions of knowledgeable peoples
00:58
this is the only second time i think in
01:00
the last over a year now that i've
01:01
spoken to a room of actual people
01:04
as opposed to the never-ending cycle of
01:05
100 virtual events
01:08
uh where you largely don't see anyone on
01:10
the other side and it's really nice to i
01:12
think have this
01:13
hybrid model of events become the new
01:14
norm uh we're all here today in person
01:17
in a fully
01:18
very very covert safe room and i think
01:21
we have 150 or so people
01:23
joining us online and others will catch
01:25
up on youtube later so
01:26
i really like that model it caters to
01:28
everyone whether you want to turn up in
01:29
person or watch from your pajamas later
01:31
on i think it
01:32
it has a lot of traction the report
01:35
produced as a part of this project
01:37
makes a very strong and compelling
01:39
argument for a ramp up
01:40
in australian focus on quantum and that
01:43
would include a clear strategy
01:45
strong political leadership and
01:46
organized policy focus and public
01:48
investment
01:49
quantum computing quantum communications
01:51
and other quantum enabled technologies
01:53
will change the world
01:54
reshaping geopolitics international
01:55
cooperation and strategic competition
01:58
and as this paper argues in the past
02:00
australia has held a competitive
02:02
advantage in this space but is at risk
02:04
of falling behind and
02:05
really i think revealed through the
02:06
research and there are copies of the
02:08
report up front
02:09
has already really fallen behind the
02:12
report also i think very importantly
02:14
recognises that quantum is just one
02:16
among a number of critical technologies
02:18
and that a step change is needed in
02:20
australia's policy settings related to
02:21
critical and
02:22
emerging technologies more generally
02:25
it was really important to i think all
02:27
of us who worked on this project over
02:28
the last year to have a very sort of
02:30
policy
02:31
focused report and there was a huge
02:32
amount of back and forth between us
02:34
on the policy recommendations which i
02:36
think ended up coming out at three or
02:38
four pages or so which is quite unusual
02:41
we also went through about 10 internal
02:42
and external peer reviewers
02:44
which again is more than usual but we
02:46
wanted to make sure that this piece of
02:47
work was commented on not just by
02:49
quantum experts
02:50
but also those who work across the
02:52
critical tech field in the private
02:53
sector on the policy side and civil
02:55
society and so on
02:57
and this i thought was really important
02:58
so we ended up examining both the
03:00
opportunity and challenges that
03:02
quantum brings australia whether it's
03:04
from a university and research
03:05
perspective a business perspective and a
03:07
government and policy perspective
03:09
the way i'll run our event today is i'm
03:11
going to ask everyone uh
03:13
i've written here i'm going to ask
03:14
everyone on stage but you're already
03:15
here um
03:16
we're all we're joined by these three
03:18
entire virtually i'm going to ask them
03:19
one to two questions each
03:21
then we'll open it up to the audience so
03:23
please make sure as they're talking you
03:25
think of different questions that you
03:26
might want answered i want to make sure
03:27
we have at least 20 minutes for a back
03:29
and forth
03:30
i also i think can get questions online
03:32
and i have an ipad here that apparently
03:34
will feed me questions which is very
03:36
convenient uh and then we'll focus bang
03:38
on we'll finish bang on 6
03:39
30 so that we can um enjoy canapes and
03:42
drinks and sorry to those online who
03:44
don't get to participate in that
03:46
uh now to our panelists and report
03:48
co-authors
03:49
so simon uh at the end here is a senior
03:52
lecturer at the center for quantum
03:53
software and information at the
03:55
university of technology sydney
03:56
and co-founder and managing director of
03:58
the quantum consultancy firm
04:00
hbar tara online joining us from
04:03
queensland he's a researcher in science
04:05
communication and responsible innovation
04:07
working with the arc centre of
04:09
excellence for engineered quantum
04:10
systems and also csiro
04:13
i'm gavin here on my left is a professor
04:15
of physics at macquarie university
04:17
working in quantum information theory
04:19
he's also director of the macquarie
04:20
center for quantum engineering and a
04:22
chief investigator
04:23
for the arc center of excellence in
04:25
engineered quantum systems and then
04:27
peter in the middle there
04:28
is a senior lecturer in arc future
04:30
fellow in the center for quantum
04:31
software
04:32
and information at the university of
04:33
technology sydney
04:36
um simon i'm going to kick off and start
04:38
with you if that's all right
04:41
the report that that you've all produced
04:43
and that we're launching today
04:45
argues that australia has previously
04:46
held a global leadership position in
04:48
quantum
04:49
but is now being left behind could you
04:51
outline to us sort of what competitive
04:53
advantage australia has
04:54
has previously held in quantum and
04:56
arguably still holds some of
04:58
and why is it and how are we falling
05:00
behind the rest of the world in this
05:02
space
05:03
well i mean we got into quantum quite
05:06
early
05:06
um compared to other nations around the
05:08
world so the the center for quantum
05:09
computing technology
05:10
was first established as a special
05:12
research center in 2000
05:14
got kicked up to a center of excellence
05:15
in 2001 when the center of excellence
05:17
schemes came into
05:19
came into the arc funding paradigm
05:23
and as a part of that we grew very very
05:25
strongly so
05:26
sydney melbourne queensland perth
05:28
basically all the capital cities
05:30
um had a very strong representation in
05:33
terms of quantum experiments
05:34
for quantum computing communication
05:36
sensing and sort of the major platforms
05:38
that we've been doing
05:39
and consequently we ended up having a
05:41
huge impact on the world stage
05:43
so we basically invented optical quantum
05:46
computing
05:47
up at the university of queensland in
05:48
griffith we invented
05:51
the silicon paradigm for quantum
05:52
computing at unsw with
05:54
professor michele simmons and others and
05:56
we had a huge theory component
05:58
up at uq down at melbourne university
06:00
where i graduated from
06:02
and that sort of kept going throughout
06:03
the 2000s australia was a very
06:06
attractive destination for quantum
06:07
researchers
06:08
obviously academics in australia get
06:09
paid comparatively quite high
06:11
on world standards and it was it was
06:13
tough to get into the australian system
06:15
and actually participate in it
06:17
then what ended up happening was around
06:20
2013 2014 we started seeing
06:23
a much heavier level of investment
06:25
coming in both from
06:27
corporations the venture capital sector
06:29
but also
06:30
governments and governments that really
06:33
didn't have much of a quantum program so
06:35
the
06:35
most notable ones china so china came in
06:37
at about 2013 2014 and started dumping a
06:40
whole lot of money into it
06:42
and started training up a huge amount of
06:44
domestic talent
06:45
uh actually mostly through japan um and
06:48
what happened is is we haven't kept up
06:50
we haven't kept up with this level of
06:52
investment we're really at a risk now of
06:53
getting crowded out
06:55
globally because we're just not
06:57
competitive from a funding standpoint so
06:59
for example
07:00
as we detailed in the report australia
07:02
was sixth
07:03
in terms of sovereign funding uh in
07:05
terms of the oecd
07:07
prior to about 2013 2014 now we're last
07:11
and in fact we're the only member of the
07:12
g12 that doesn't have a national
07:13
initiative
07:15
um so basically all major countries have
07:17
announced something the americans have
07:19
announced
07:20
several major programs including the u.s
07:22
national initiative that was a 1.2
07:23
billion dollar project
07:25
the chinese have announced that they're
07:26
dumping 13 billion into quantum
07:28
the europeans have done a billion um the
07:30
french and the germans just on their own
07:32
have done two and three billion
07:34
respectively in the last year um even
07:36
the dutch
07:37
just announced in april that they were
07:39
going to put a billion dollars into
07:40
quantum computing on top of the european
07:42
flagship
07:43
so at the moment it's just becoming
07:45
difficult for us in australia to keep up
07:47
in the way that we sort of planted the
07:48
seeds for it
07:50
in the early 2000s we still have the
07:52
talent here but we don't have the
07:53
capital
07:54
so it's becoming harder and harder for
07:56
us to sort of compete with
07:57
you know either the corporations which
07:59
are pilfering talent they're frightened
08:01
center from australia so
08:02
amazon google ibm microsoft they're all
08:04
in the game
08:05
um or it's other national initiatives
08:09
that have huge experimental budgets or
08:10
theoretical budgets
08:13
so unless australia really sort of
08:14
decides okay we're going to have to do
08:16
this we're going to have to do this much
08:17
more seriously
08:18
now i wouldn't for a second suggest that
08:20
we can compete financially with the
08:22
level of china's investment or the u.s
08:24
investment
08:25
but we did a comparatively very good job
08:27
in the early 2000s
08:29
when it came to holding our own even
08:31
though
08:32
smaller population a smaller capital
08:34
base to play with
08:35
we've just got to take it to the next
08:36
order of magnitude if the rest of the
08:38
world's going to increase funding by a
08:40
factor of 10 or 100
08:42
we've got to increase it by a factor of
08:43
10 or 100. so that won't necessarily
08:46
match the other investments but it will
08:47
keep us in the game
08:49
tara i'm going to throw to you now
08:51
online
08:53
um in the public discourse around
08:56
critical technologies we hear sort of
08:58
bits and pieces about
09:00
what these technologies are and what
09:01
they're capable of
09:03
but how that is portrayed publicly i
09:04
think can be quite patchy and seen
09:06
through a particular lens so for example
09:07
how quantum may benefit
09:09
uh just the defense force or one
09:11
particular industry sector
09:12
what i think is often missing and this
09:14
came through a lot of your contributions
09:16
to the report
09:17
is how quantum will likely impact us on
09:19
a societal and individual level
09:21
could you run us through how you see
09:23
quantum impacting our society and us as
09:25
individuals over the next say decade or
09:27
two
09:30
so i think um first off we we
09:33
covered up a bit of a time frame um i
09:36
think in the report to try and give
09:37
people a little bit of scope
09:39
uh for for addressing where we see
09:42
near-term and then long-term
09:44
implications of quantum technologies um
09:47
i guess on the international scale the
09:50
important thing that i think came
09:51
through
09:52
is like we heard from the chief
09:54
scientist in march that
09:55
quantum is this particularly
09:58
game-changing industry for australia
10:00
but like any significant piece of
10:02
technology it needs to be developed like
10:05
responsibly
10:05
ethically and inclusively and if we've
10:08
learned anything
10:09
from the history of technology in
10:11
society it's like two key things
10:14
first that we're pretty terrible at
10:15
anticipating how technology can impact
10:18
us and second we can't just assume that
10:21
that's all going to happen
10:22
in some sense of public benefit so
10:24
trying to think through some of those
10:26
things is one of the recommendations
10:27
that we put into the report
10:30
the promises that we hear from quantum
10:32
technology use in society are really
10:34
broad and that's what makes them so
10:35
exciting so it spans these
10:37
multiple areas so healthcare all the way
10:40
through to financial services
10:42
telecommunications through things like
10:44
well weather modeling
10:46
but the conversation that we're not
10:48
having at the moment is really around
10:51
the public good of those technologies so
10:54
breaking down the motivations for
10:56
investment beyond just talking about
10:58
national security and economic gain
11:00
which you know those are not surprising
11:02
motivations for any national policy
11:04
in technology they're kind of the
11:06
default reasons for investment
11:08
um but i think we need a little bit more
11:11
so starting to look into more grounded
11:13
case studies about individual
11:16
technologies so if we're thinking about
11:18
those near-term
11:19
options looking at something like
11:21
quantum sensors and thinking about how
11:23
we see them in different areas like
11:26
civil engineering
11:27
in resource recovery and in autonomous
11:29
systems so three very
11:31
diverse kind of use cases just there
11:35
and then delving into who will be
11:37
impacted by that development in use
11:40
and taking our lead from the examples
11:43
from other novel technologies so
11:45
most prominently we've got artificial
11:46
intelligence and machine learning
11:49
where our understanding of the peoples
11:52
and the environments that we're going to
11:53
be most impacted
11:54
by those technologies came a bit late
11:56
and we had to be quite reactive
11:58
in our responses and mitigating ongoing
12:01
problems
12:03
we've also seen that a bit in energy
12:04
efficient technology so chibita
12:06
pathurasi
12:08
in in the us pointed out to congress
12:10
that research and development can be
12:12
really focused on feasibility and
12:14
economic gain
12:15
and inequities and innovation are then
12:18
addressed retrospectively with limited
12:20
success
12:21
so in the report the idea was that
12:24
there's a bit of a call
12:26
for us to be proactive as a nation about
12:28
what we're going to do with novel
12:29
quantum technologies
12:31
and and thinking about how we can really
12:32
benefit from it
12:34
so maximizing the benefits of the
12:36
technologies and bringing in
12:37
stakeholders to make it better
12:40
there are different tools that we can
12:41
use for that like inclusive design and
12:43
responsible innovation
12:45
and the policy recommendation was really
12:47
about making use of different expertise
12:50
in dialogue with government and policy
12:52
and industry
12:53
as well as everyone in quantum
12:56
to approach technologies uh from the
12:59
different viewpoints
13:00
and then establish a framework of some
13:02
principles for best
13:03
uh practice creation and then i think
13:05
use
13:06
so that we can prepare the tools and
13:08
processes that we need for governing
13:10
their introduction and use in in our
13:12
society
13:15
thanks tara i wish you were here with us
13:17
on stage today um
13:19
gavin i'm going to turn to you now um
13:22
there appears to be
13:24
this global race to build quantum
13:25
technologies sort of happening in real
13:27
time
13:28
um how is this race playing out around
13:30
the world and what strategies
13:32
at different countries around the world
13:33
employing when it comes to quantum
13:35
whether it's our allies or
13:37
or partner countries or countries that
13:39
are not our partners or our allies
13:41
and a chaser to that which really makes
13:43
yours unfortunately a three-part
13:44
question
13:46
is that in the report uh you all argue
13:48
that this is not just a race about
13:49
science and commerce but it's a race for
13:51
geopolitical leadership
13:53
what does that sort of really mean yes
13:56
uh it's a great question so in fact
13:59
yeah questions there is a real race and
14:02
you can actually see it played out
14:04
um so you know a couple years ago
14:07
google announced a quantum supremacy
14:09
experiments where they
14:11
they demonstrated in a 53 qubit
14:14
cubit is what we call a quantum bit
14:16
device
14:17
the sycamore chip which performed a
14:20
computation
14:21
which would be extremely hard to do
14:25
on our classical computers even
14:26
including supercomputers
14:28
and not long after there was a response
14:32
from
14:32
competitors there was a response from
14:34
ibm saying well let's think about that a
14:36
little more carefully maybe we could
14:38
alibaba had a response in china and then
14:41
of course there was an actual
14:42
experimental demonstration by the
14:43
chinese
14:44
of another problem that's very hard to
14:46
solve on classical computers
14:48
i should mention that both of these
14:49
problems the ones by the chinese and by
14:52
14:52
are completely useless as actual
14:55
computational problems but in terms of
14:57
demonstration it's a very
14:59
big technical and scientific advance in
15:02
demonstrating
15:02
control of quantum devices at the single
15:05
level to a point
15:06
where we could do something that just
15:08
could not be done on classical computers
15:10
in a reasonable time
15:11
and you're going to see this race
15:12
playing out a lot more so there there
15:15
are some big players
15:16
on the scene for quantum computing
15:18
there's
15:19
of course google ibm microsoft
15:24
and uh then then there are some
15:28
less well-known companies but they're
15:31
not no longer really could think of them
15:32
as startups but actually
15:34
large companies uh like psy quantum
15:37
which works on photonic quantum
15:39
computing
15:39
co-founded by two australians
15:42
experimentalists and a theorist
15:44
there is ion q based in the us which is
15:47
working with what are called trapped ion
15:49
quantum computers
15:52
and there's another company in toronto
15:55
um xanadu which was founded by an
15:58
australian
15:58
experimentalist began on photonic
16:00
quantum computing
16:02
um and it's
16:05
we don't know who's going to be the
16:07
winner we don't even know what
16:08
technology is going to win
16:10
but you really see it as a very
16:12
competitive race and
16:14
people aren't releasing all their
16:15
results it you know
16:17
a few years ago people were quite open
16:20
about saying what their technology could
16:21
do
16:22
now it's much more secretive you learn
16:25
as you go
16:27
because it's a big payout uh i could
16:29
just say like when i started out
16:31
my first postdoc fellowship was uh
16:34
funded by darpa to work on quantum
16:37
computer architectures
16:39
and that was in the u.s at nist
16:42
and the intelligence communities were a
16:45
big part
16:46
of getting the program started in the
16:47
u.s because they actually worked closely
16:50
with the scientists this is another
16:51
thing we pointed out in our report that
16:53
it's important
16:54
to open up these levels of communication
16:57
between the scientists and
16:58
the intelligence communities um but and
17:01
that was largely spurred because quantum
17:03
computers could be used to crap
17:06
public key cryptography which which of
17:08
course is used from everything from
17:09
credit card transactions to
17:12
uh you know attorney attorney client
17:15
privilege
17:15
documents which are secured uh
17:18
using publication cryptography that you
17:20
want to have secured for a long time
17:22
if a quantum computer comes out then
17:26
you've completely lost the privacy
17:27
associated with those kinds of documents
17:29
so it's a big risk and people you know
17:32
want to spend a lot of money
17:33
um but now uh yes
17:37
it's really unsure whether whether the
17:39
us is going to
17:40
have this kind of dominant position that
17:42
they've initially had because of the
17:43
initial investment
17:44
because of these big infusions of cash
17:46
in europe and in china
17:48
south korea and japan and we believe
17:51
that
17:52
australia should be one of these players
17:54
because we have the
17:55
intellectual capital people want to come
17:57
here
17:59
we just need the the political will and
18:01
the investor interest
18:03
um and to get into the third question
18:05
try to not
18:06
take up too much time yes so there are
18:09
there are a lot of uh consequences for
18:12
quantum technologies beyond just
18:13
cracking codes and just doing things
18:15
faster
18:16
so there's for example there's
18:20
quantum sensors which you know everyone
18:22
has a phone
18:23
which oftentimes has an accelerometer
18:27
and a magnetometer these devices that
18:29
help you navigate
18:31
and you know important issues of if
18:34
you're in a situation of
18:35
a gps denied environment because of some
18:38
attack
18:39
then quantum technologies can provide
18:41
you a way to
18:43
efficiently and accurately navigate your
18:46
your
18:46
your um craft um and
18:49
uh they can also use quantum sensors for
18:51
mining
18:53
so if you have a much better way to
18:54
determine where precious minerals are
18:57
you will have a strategic advantage over
18:58
your competitors which will certainly
19:00
play a role
19:01
for example in mining activities in
19:03
africa and other nations where
19:06
you you need to be the best the best
19:09
team around
19:10
to get the advantage of having access to
19:13
those
19:14
those minerals so
19:18
there are a lot of geopolitical
19:20
consequences as well
19:22
to movement towards digital currencies
19:24
because
19:25
suddenly you're going to have power of
19:27
computation determining
19:29
the value and integrity of currencies
19:32
and
19:33
who has access to the best computing
19:35
devices which will be quantum
19:38
will have an advantage in that sector so
19:41
yeah all these things become quite
19:42
interlinked in sometimes ways we didn't
19:44
anticipate years ago
19:46
it also sounds incredibly multi-sector
19:48
like this isn't just a defense issue
19:49
actually it'll be agriculture and
19:52
healthcare as you said strategic
19:53
minerals like a whole bunch of areas it
19:55
sounds like it will be really
19:56
impacted um peter lucky last and again i
20:00
think i've got a two header here for you
20:03
i wanted you to come in on what
20:05
specifically are the opportunities and
20:07
threats when it comes to quantum tech
20:10
from the national security defense and
20:12
intelligence space we have a whole
20:13
section that sort of zooms in on that in
20:15
the report
20:16
and then a follow-up and i'll remind you
20:19
of this if you
20:20
go deep on this first question um so
20:22
that we come back here
20:24
for the australian government um what
20:26
are the sort of
20:27
the urgent or really critical gaps that
20:29
you think need to be filled here from i
20:31
guess a policy recommendation
20:32
perspective
20:33
so in terms of opportunities and threats
20:35
i mean some of them were alluded to
20:37
before
20:37
things like the ability to crack codes
20:39
it's pretty obvious that that poses a
20:41
significant
20:41
intelligence threat but also a huge boon
20:44
to anybody who possesses it
20:47
so you can immediately see that there
20:48
are some strategic considerations here
20:49
it's not just about
20:50
we want to develop this technology and
20:52
have it we also need to be mindful of
20:54
who we don't want to have it
20:55
but at the same time some of these
20:57
technologies also offset one another so
20:59
another big area of quantum technology
21:01
is quantum cryptography where we can
21:02
make
21:03
cryptographic codes that even quantum
21:05
computers can't break
21:06
so there's a potential method to bypass
21:09
the threat
21:09
of quantum computing in compromising our
21:12
codes of the past but at the same time
21:15
these things
21:16
naturally progress into one another
21:17
currently we're able to demonstrate
21:19
quantum cryptography quite well over
21:21
short scales and the chinese have done
21:22
it by satellite
21:23
over almost 2 000 kilometers within
21:26
mainland china
21:29
and that naturally is the type of
21:31
technology that later on will be
21:32
utilized when we build full-fledged
21:34
quantum computers
21:35
so you can't just deny single uh
21:39
use uh sort of um abilities of quantum
21:42
technologies they they all feed into one
21:44
another and there's a complex interplay
21:46
but the dominant one of course is the
21:48
economic interplay
21:50
because ultimately economics is what
21:52
determines strategic strength
21:54
so we want to be able to have mutual
21:56
benefit from others in the advancement
21:58
of these technologies in the same way
22:00
that we're all better off by the fact
22:01
that the whole world is connected on the
22:02
internet
22:03
that's undeniably mutual benefit but at
22:06
the same time
22:07
in with classical super computing there
22:09
are certain countries that we deny
22:10
access to for supercomputing facilities
22:12
because of potential malicious uses
22:15
so there's a very very complex dynamics
22:16
here which is why
22:18
it's not just as simple as we want to
22:20
pump more money into research and we
22:21
want to make sure that this is advanced
22:22
as quickly as possible
22:24
there needs to be unified consideration
22:26
in the same way that there is with many
22:28
other dual use technologies
22:30
what is our place in the world we're a
22:31
medium-sized economy we're not a
22:33
superpower we don't even get to dictate
22:35
the path here
22:36
we have to acknowledge where we sit in
22:38
the world and from that
22:40
also make diplomatic decisions how are
22:42
we going to form alliances in the future
22:43
given the huge
22:45
uh political influence that this kind of
22:47
technology could have
22:49
and the second question you said yes
22:54
um no that's all right um and it could
22:56
be unfair for me to
22:58
to pretend i'm asking one question each
22:59
when really there's two three probably
23:01
even four wrapped up in there
23:03
yeah what i want to know is you know
23:06
if you're up in parliament or you're a
23:08
senior policy maker across a range of
23:10
department agencies
23:12
and and they're suddenly told okay we
23:13
really need to focus on quantum
23:15
right where do you think the most urgent
23:17
gaps are the gap is that we don't do
23:19
exactly what you just said which is
23:21
having a unified umbrella that oversees
23:23
all of these things at this very very
23:25
high level
23:26
at the moment our approach is we pump a
23:28
certain amount of money into research
23:30
and development in this sector
23:32
there are lots of people that approach
23:34
people like us for advice on
23:36
how this might affect their future
23:38
business operations
23:39
financial optimization whatever the case
23:41
may be
23:42
all these different interests involved
23:45
and money being pumped into it
23:47
but not with any sort of cohesive
23:49
long-term vision of
23:50
what's the ultimate goal here it's not
23:52
just throwing money at things it's about
23:55
creating a domestic ecosystem which
23:57
satisfies the needs of the country as a
23:59
whole
24:00
and the same way with anything that has
24:02
strategic uh
24:04
importance it's not just you throw money
24:06
at it wildly
24:07
you need an overall goal of how does
24:09
this fit into our place in the world as
24:11
a medium-sized economy and alliances
24:13
that we have
24:13
how does this affect our future
24:15
alliances and diplomatic considerations
24:17
because we don't get to dictate the path
24:19
we're part of
24:21
the global economy and we're a
24:23
relatively small player in that but we
24:25
can't just go it alone
24:27
and what about just from a defense
24:28
intelligence and national security
24:30
perspective what do you
24:32
see as the sort of key policy makers
24:34
there and i mean
24:35
feel free to come in on this across all
24:37
four of you
24:38
yeah i mean that is uh from a national
24:41
securities perspective that is certainly
24:43
one of the most important ones to
24:45
defence and intelligence for
24:46
the sorts of reasons that we that we've
24:48
discussed um
24:50
and that's exactly why um it shouldn't
24:52
just be
24:53
allowed to be a free-for-all because
24:54
obviously some of these technologies
24:56
just like
24:57
back in the cold war the obvious
24:58
parallel is is nuclear technologies
25:00
it's hugely advantageous for certain
25:02
applications hugely detrimental for
25:04
others if they go into the wrong hands
25:06
and like any sort of dual use technology
25:09
it needs to be thought of in that kind
25:10
of framework where
25:12
how does this uh affect our alliances
25:14
and our and our
25:15
global diplomatic position
25:18
i mean i will just add to that that in
25:20
compare
25:21
in comparison to say the united states
25:23
or countries in europe
25:25
the defense and intelligence sector in
25:26
this country has not engaged
25:28
in the same way um as gavin said
25:31
um when this got started in the 90s and
25:33
the 2000s the us intelligence and
25:35
defects
25:36
defense sectors were heavily involved in
25:38
funding the research and supervising the
25:40
research and talking to scientists
25:42
um i don't know if you guys know i don't
25:45
know anyone in our community that holds
25:46
high-level security grounds
25:48
they can even have these discussions
25:50
with members of defence or intelligence
25:52
and say okay where do you see the
25:54
threats being and how does
25:56
how do you think quantum is going to
25:58
help you or how do you think quantum is
25:59
going to hurt you
26:00
uh in the long term um i don't know
26:02
anyone who has that level of engagement
26:04
and it's also
26:04
they're difficult to choose to fill
26:06
those ones because people in that kind
26:08
of position
26:09
can't just be your everyday sort of
26:11
intelligence
26:12
defense type of people they need to be
26:14
people with an intimate understanding of
26:16
of the nuance of this technology it's
26:19
very different to conventional
26:20
technologies that we're all familiar
26:22
with and there's an
26:23
enormous amount of nuance and subtlety
26:24
to it and so
26:26
people in those sorts of strategic
26:28
decision-making positions need to have a
26:30
clear understanding
26:31
of the nuances of the technology as well
26:33
which which is a difficult thing to fill
26:37
i'm gonna ask one more question and then
26:38
we've got quite a few questions coming
26:40
in on online and i'll also open it up
26:43
um before a couple you guys were talking
26:46
about
26:46
um you know heads of sort of these
26:50
quantum startup companies which really
26:51
aren't startups anymore and i don't know
26:53
if you did this deliberately but
26:54
almost everyone you mentioned was an
26:56
australian citizen who had co-co-founded
26:58
the company
26:59
started the company are any of these
27:01
people in australia
27:02
are they is the brain drain sort of all
27:04
happening to the us and europe
27:06
and what does it take to get to get
27:08
people back here
27:11
well yeah so the drain is to where the
27:14
money is
27:14
and also where the big fabrication
27:16
facilities are which is silicon valley
27:20
and the investors you know they're
27:24
willing to make that risk because
27:25
there's a big payout
27:27
and um and it's it's proven technology
27:30
you know it's built up
27:32
it's taken time but the principles are
27:35
correct
27:35
and it's past the test there really is
27:38
no
27:39
no fundamental obstacle to getting these
27:41
things built
27:42
um and uh yeah i think in australia
27:46
it takes it does take a national
27:49
initiative
27:50
but it's not just about the government
27:52
spending money it's
27:53
it's also about you know fostering a
27:56
culture with investors here who are
27:57
willing to
27:59
to you know make the leap and
28:02
and i just have to say that australia is
28:05
recognized as
28:06
as being a really great country to come
28:08
to i mean i i was attracted to come here
28:11
um i know many people around the world
28:13
in europe and
28:14
north america who very much like
28:18
australia
28:18
would live here but you know if they're
28:21
if they're involved with startup
28:22
companies uh
28:25
it's just easier to to go elsewhere
28:27
that's just the
28:28
the investments is is available there to
28:31
more jobs elsewhere yeah there's more
28:33
there's more jobs there um we have a
28:35
question from mark who's
28:37
uh watching online and he's asked when
28:40
you postulate a strategic race you have
28:42
to consider not only how useful the tech
28:44
could be but also how likely it is that
28:46
a competitor will gain that capability
28:48
far enough in advance of you doing so
28:50
that they will be able to use that
28:51
advantage
28:52
how likely is a major strategic surprise
28:56
that ends up making a difference
28:59
who would like a turn at that and tara
29:01
just throw your hand up online if you
29:03
want to jump in on any questions
29:05
and i'll throw specific ones to you well
29:08
i mean
29:08
certainly it can't be denied the chinese
29:11
level of investment into quantum
29:12
technology has spurred
29:14
a lot of the other investment into
29:15
quantum technology the americans did get
29:17
spooked
29:18
a little bit and sort of got caught a
29:20
bit on the back foot with their
29:21
initiative
29:22
um that sort of came on the back of sort
29:23
of the chinese announcements in regards
29:25
to
29:26
their push to to heavily industrialize
29:28
and commercialize their quantum
29:30
technology
29:31
and they have spent a lot of money in
29:32
that space
29:34
so again whether or not you want to say
29:36
we're at the stage now where somebody's
29:37
pulling ahead we're not
29:39
quite there yet in the sense that you
29:41
could say you know chinese technology is
29:43
significantly better than the americans
29:44
or significantly better than the
29:45
europeans
29:47
but i suppose that that is something
29:48
that's going to happen in the next five
29:50
or six years
29:51
um depending on whether it's the startup
29:53
space or the corporate space or the
29:55
sovereign space
29:56
now just also to be clear people see the
29:58
money that comes into google and comes
30:00
in from ibm and
30:01
the vc community but sovereign
30:04
investment still dwarfs
30:06
all of this the amount of money that
30:08
governments are spending onto their
30:09
national initiatives and their national
30:10
research programs are still much much
30:12
larger than what's coming in from the
30:13
private sector at this stage
30:15
so have we gotten to the point where
30:17
there could be a strategic surprise
30:20
in an adversary or a non-friendly nation
30:23
pulling too far ahead
30:24
no not yet in fact everyone's somewhat
30:28
level i would say um as gavin mentioned
30:31
there's multi-platforms for quantum
30:33
computing which
30:34
in and of itself is hard to explain
30:37
because people you know if it says
30:38
there's different types of computers if
30:40
it was your standard laptop you know
30:41
people would think oh okay it's intel
30:43
versus
30:45
power pc or it's mac versus windows but
30:47
it's all still silicon based technology
30:49
in the quantum computing space we have
30:52
seven at least systems that are
30:55
completely different from each other
30:56
some are based on particles of light
30:58
some are based on atoms some based on
31:00
all kinds of different things and so we
31:03
haven't
31:04
yet sort of filtered that out yet
31:06
everything's sort of about the same
31:08
most of these systems can reliably
31:10
produce qubits we can fabricate them we
31:12
can control them quite well
31:14
but during the 2020s that's going to
31:16
change by the end of the 2020s i think
31:18
we're going to have a much cleaner
31:19
outlook
31:19
of what's going to happen both in the
31:21
computation sensing and communication
31:23
space
31:24
do you think that cleaner outlook is
31:25
going to attract more funding from sort
31:27
of medium-sized
31:29
governments once they realize the
31:31
potential or a weak spirit
31:33
he is always an attractor nothing a
31:36
business likes more than there's some
31:37
sort of predictability
31:39
what's this really going to do for us
31:40
sort of but the fact that we can't
31:41
predict it at the moment does mean that
31:43
it's a blue sky investment
31:45
first yeah all right let's open it up to
31:48
questions i've got a few more coming
31:49
online
31:50
does anyone want to jump in did you want
31:52
to jump in there
31:56
thank you um yes i have a question
32:00
um we mentioned that goals for australia
32:03
as a
32:03
medium-sized economy um what sort of
32:06
goal do you think we should have
32:07
in this quantum world
32:11
so there are multiple goals but um
32:15
the first and foremost long-term goal is
32:18
that
32:18
we can't put ourselves in a position
32:20
where we end up becoming purely a client
32:22
state if you think of our reliance
32:25
on silicon chips at the moment we're
32:27
completely dependent upon
32:29
others the same applies to
32:33
so much technology software is easy to
32:35
make at home
32:36
but all of the hardware is effectively
32:38
entirely manufactured overseas
32:41
obviously there's a huge risk associated
32:43
with that if someone decides to close
32:44
the tap then you're in big trouble
32:46
um the same applies with any technology
32:49
and
32:50
the real profit making not just in the
32:52
monetary sense but
32:53
also in terms of the strategic
32:55
positioning comes in who is the supplier
32:57
not just who
32:58
buys it as a client and that's what we
33:01
have to avoid and why we have to get in
33:03
early
33:03
is to position ourselves so that we're
33:05
producing things and selling them to
33:07
others
33:08
rather than licensing a cloud
33:10
subscription service from a future
33:13
quantum cloud provider
33:25
well it's not as though we have the
33:27
ability to to have
33:29
any kind of complete market dominance in
33:31
this space just
33:32
because of our economic size we can't
33:34
possibly compete with large economies
33:37
but even though you can't dominate it
33:39
you can still play
33:40
um an integral role where you're you're
33:42
part of the dependency that other people
33:44
rely on
33:45
you don't you don't have to be producing
33:47
all the chips in the world
33:49
to play a part in the supply chain for
33:51
computers
33:52
so we need to have an integral role in
33:54
the production process
33:55
and the provision process but it's hard
33:57
to foresee exactly what that will be
33:59
do either of you want to jump in on this
34:01
and i thought we could also move to tara
34:03
as well about what the key goals are
34:04
from her perspective
34:07
i mean national coordination i think is
34:10
a is a key
34:10
goal that we would like to see certainly
34:12
as the authors of this report to come
34:13
out of this
34:15
i mean the evolution of quantum in this
34:17
country
34:18
and it's certainly not the fault of
34:20
anyone specifically or the community
34:22
itself it's the nature of academic
34:23
research in australia the arc is not
34:26
a huge budget there is a finite pie that
34:28
we're all playing with
34:30
and we england sort of come in the 2000s
34:33
um you know everyone was grasping at
34:35
this thing so of course that sort of
34:36
bifurcated the nation a little bit and
34:38
it did so a lot along state lines but
34:41
even
34:41
across universities i mean you have unsw
34:44
fighting with usage you have monash
34:46
fighting with melbourne and the second
34:47
tier universities come in
34:49
this is happened all over the world it
34:52
certainly happened in australia
34:53
the rest of the world seems to be
34:55
coalescing better
34:57
they seem to be saying okay you guys
34:59
were fractured in the 90s and the 2000s
35:01
because it was only a research program
35:03
you're all fighting over the same
35:04
research pie but now we're saying okay
35:07
we're going to put more capital into
35:09
this and we're going to actually force
35:10
you guys to get along
35:12
and coordinate a lot better i mean the
35:13
centers of excellence programs in
35:15
australia sort of do this
35:17
but they are limited they aren't you
35:20
know they're very very good from an
35:21
academic research point of view but
35:23
again if you look at the centres in
35:24
america or europe they're an order of
35:26
magnitude
35:27
more heavily funded they're an order of
35:29
magnitude more participants
35:31
um both from the standpoint of academic
35:34
faculty and industry partnership so
35:36
that's another key goal that we've been
35:37
looking for and hopefully can push with
35:39
this report and
35:41
all of these countries whether it's the
35:42
european union or the united states
35:44
they tend to appoint somebody so the
35:46
united states for example
35:48
it's the second person now they're part
35:50
of the white house office of science and
35:52
technology policy
35:54
but their job is to try and provide a
35:56
coordinated framework and bring these
35:58
people in together
35:59
um so i think that was one of our
36:00
recommendations in the report that we
36:02
were thinking of
36:03
you know as having somebody there and an
36:05
especially appointed role within
36:07
government to say okay the time has come
36:09
for the nation to come together
36:11
figure out how to do this on a national
36:12
level rather than you know state by
36:14
state and university by university
36:17
gavin do you want to add anything before
36:18
i jump over to you tara
36:20
uh no just well just say absolutely i
36:23
think that the national coordination is
36:25
very important
36:26
and also because it it gives you a
36:28
history
36:29
with different people coming in and so
36:32
you know people are they have experience
36:35
with what are the issues
36:36
they can also separate the hype from
36:39
reality and that takes someone who's
36:42
you know who's really a dedicated person
36:45
who can frequently talk to the
36:47
scientists
36:48
but also to policymakers yeah
36:52
tara what about from your perspective
36:53
because there were really big chunks
36:55
of the policy recommendations i'm
36:56
thinking at the end there that that you
36:58
worked on
37:01
so i guess sorry um in terms of
37:04
of goals for the nation if we're looking
37:08
at coordination
37:09
one of the options is is starting to try
37:11
and pick some of those
37:13
winners in the near-term technologies
37:15
and i guess you could look to the uk
37:17
for some examples there in terms of how
37:19
they used a hub
37:20
model to do that um it
37:24
it would be i think the thing i'm
37:26
hearing from stakeholders in the
37:27
community is thinking about how tech
37:29
transfer works
37:31
in our universities and our industry
37:33
sector is really important
37:35
as well as how we engage with industry
37:37
and and find those
37:38
um you know those use cases as proof of
37:42
concepts
37:42
in in different australian-based
37:45
industries i think that will be really
37:46
important thanks tara i'm going to jump
37:50
back online because the questions have
37:51
really been
37:52
banking up here it's making me a bit
37:54
nervous um
37:55
we have a question from michael has the
37:57
uk established
37:59
an overall integrated strategy for
38:00
quantum and are there direct
38:02
collaboration opportunities there for
38:03
australia
38:04
let's broaden that out because i
38:05
actually have another question i was
38:07
going to throw at all of you
38:08
um about let's broaden it out to um
38:12
are there direct collaboration
38:14
opportunities let's say for a fiver
38:16
the five eyes but also for sort of close
38:17
partners so i'm thinking sort of
38:19
india japan south korea taiwan
38:22
who wants to jump in first there well i
38:25
mean
38:26
we've had the collaborations for a long
38:28
time i mean to get to the first question
38:30
the uk has got
38:31
somewhat of a coordinated strategy as
38:32
tara mentioned it's the hub programs
38:35
so i think it's it's five hubs now that
38:38
they've got
38:38
around the uk i think it's five um but
38:41
they're all based out of a different
38:43
area of the uk so i think quantum
38:45
imaging is based out of
38:46
glasgow quantum networking's based out
38:48
of oxford
38:50
um but they've got multiple ones of
38:51
these that come under sort of the hub of
38:52
the
38:53
the quantum hubs program in the uk um
38:56
also included in this is is
38:58
in the uk model centers for doctoral
39:00
training um
39:01
in various topics across quantum again
39:04
sort of located at different
39:05
universities
39:06
so we've sort of taken a first step
39:08
towards that we've
39:09
announced where we started last year the
39:12
sydney quantum academy which was a state
39:14
government-funded effort
39:15
to try and do uh hdr and other higher
39:18
degree training
39:19
um in the quantum space but that's the
39:21
only one whereas the uk's got them
39:24
everywhere and it's not just for quantum
39:26
computing it's it's
39:28
for quantum engineering it's for a whole
39:30
bunch of other topics
39:32
um in terms of collaborations beyond
39:34
that again
39:35
as australia and australians have been
39:38
sort of scattered far and wide we all
39:39
have
39:40
collaborations overseas with various
39:42
countries such as this
39:43
um however it's it's getting a little
39:47
bit harder
39:48
because a lot of the opportunities that
39:50
exist in other countries
39:52
again sort of crowd us out and they
39:54
don't need us in the same way that they
39:56
did or they're not incentivized
39:57
in the same way that was before so for
40:00
example
40:01
um when amazon set up their quantum
40:04
division
40:05
the people who set it up we're very
40:07
strong collaborators with the head of
40:08
quantum
40:09
at aws and a lot of the people there we
40:11
know some of them are from sydney
40:13
they've been poached recently um
40:16
and aws i i think would love to come to
40:18
australia and set something up in
40:20
australia and say we'll have a
40:21
divisional office in sydney or i have a
40:22
divisional office in melbourne
40:24
but they have a much better incentive
40:26
structure in the us
40:27
so they'll do it at caltech same with
40:29
ibm and mit
40:32
they get sweeteners they get incentives
40:35
for doing it within the united states
40:37
and while we have good talent in
40:39
australia and respected talent in
40:40
australia with these collaborations
40:42
that doesn't trump you know
40:46
a tax break for building a building at
40:48
caltech caltech research isn't good
40:49
enough
40:51
we don't provide that extra extra level
40:54
so certainly the emerging markets
40:57
particularly india
40:58
i've been looking at quite strongly
41:00
because india's announced a one billion
41:01
dollar
41:02
national initiative as in most countries
41:04
but they don't have
41:06
much domestic talent in india and when
41:09
china did it
41:10
when they started flooding capital into
41:12
their sector they ended up sending a lot
41:14
of their people to japan
41:16
so they flooded the japanese system with
41:18
post-docs with phd students who would go
41:20
into japan who were
41:22
again a country that got into this quite
41:24
early so they had a lot of experience in
41:25
it
41:26
trained up all their people and
41:28
basically said look
41:29
you get one nature paper or you get a
41:32
couple of
41:32
minor publications there's a
41:34
professorship back for you in china
41:36
immediately if you come home and they
41:37
did this aggressively
41:39
in the early 2010s so india could be
41:41
something for us
41:42
along those lines whether it's something
41:44
through a model like the sydney quantum
41:46
academy
41:47
um but to sort of say look you guys want
41:48
to gear up you want to build up your
41:50
domestic talent well partner with us
41:52
we've got the talent to do it and and
41:54
we're happy to do that
41:57
peter gavin anything to add yeah i mean
41:59
your reference to
42:00
the firewise network is a really
42:02
irrelevant one actually uh coming back
42:04
to the point i made earlier because
42:05
obviously that particular intelligence
42:08
alliance is what
42:09
dominates our our intelligence
42:11
operations and that's
42:13
obviously led by the united states being
42:15
the the largest party in that
42:17
um given that close knit arrangement for
42:20
intelligence
42:21
services between these countries it's
42:23
clear that
42:25
the quantum space is going to fit in
42:26
there in the future given its
42:28
implications for intelligence gathering
42:30
and the dominant power of the united
42:32
states in that alliance means that
42:34
a lot could be imposed upon us in the
42:36
way that we go about deploying quantum
42:38
technologies
42:39
and and who we allow to access them
42:42
in the same way that there are all these
42:43
other very strict arrangements in
42:45
intelligent sharing so those sorts of
42:47
alliances will play a very very dominant
42:49
role in how we go about pursuing this
42:52
and in other critical texts as well like
42:54
this isn't just a quantum thing do we
42:55
think that the five eyes in terms of
42:58
intelligence um gathering i mean it
43:00
seems particularly
43:02
relevant to quantum computing given its
43:04
ability to compromise certain codes and
43:06
uh and create new ones that are very
43:08
very secure
43:09
uh but but it does apply to other
43:11
technologies as well but i think to a
43:13
lesser extent given how ubiquitous
43:14
classical technologies are
43:16
yeah yeah i'll just just add that it is
43:18
actually pretty common for
43:20
us as researchers to be involved with
43:23
projects that are funded
43:24
through for example the u.s military
43:27
um and the u.s army has announced that
43:30
they're gonna you know have open calls
43:32
which will be available to australian
43:33
researchers
43:34
um but in terms of like a a more
43:36
coordinated efforts
43:38
towards you know like kind of a
43:40
manhattan project but between
43:42
five eyes company five eyes countries uh
43:46
i'm not privy to those conversations if
43:48
they exist
43:49
but it's an interesting idea
43:53
do you have any um questions out here
43:54
from the floor we've got gosh we've got
43:57
a lot
43:57
let's start over here and then we'll
43:59
make our way that way
44:02
um i think this question might be more
44:04
posed towards peter
44:05
just based on his discussion earlier um
44:08
but it's open to everyone um there's
44:11
been a lot of recent
44:13
discussion and research coming out about
44:15
how these new
44:16
critical technologies like quantum
44:18
computing might affect
44:20
our regional strategic stability um
44:23
especially in defense and intelligence
44:25
relating to how it might as
44:26
act as a force multiplier for um
44:30
nuclear forces possibly or even
44:34
conventional advanced conventional
44:36
weaponry um
44:37
do you believe that these threats uh to
44:40
strategic stability are real and could
44:42
australia have some sort of
44:44
impact in mediating these insecurities
44:48
possibly through a third-party um
44:51
mediation or negotiation
44:54
right so that that that's a good point
44:57
because um
44:58
inevitably in the future we are going to
45:01
have
45:01
quantum facilities on our soil and
45:04
certainly lots of intellectual property
45:06
where that position is is hard to
45:08
predict but we will have a significant
45:09
position
45:10
um and there'll be lots of smaller
45:12
nations that will want to
45:14
utilize the power of quantum
45:15
technologies but
45:17
can't afford it because it's going to at
45:19
least initially give it be hugely
45:21
expensive compared to the the sorts of
45:22
computing equipment that we use at the
45:24
moment
45:25
so you might be licensing it out through
45:26
a cloud service as we mentioned earlier
45:28
or
45:29
or renting it out whatever the case may
45:32
be
45:33
there's huge soft power in that right i
45:36
mean if you've got if you're surrounded
45:37
by developing countries uh
45:39
which we are um that would want to to
45:42
access
45:43
uh these sorts of technologies that's
45:45
perfect diplomatic soft power
45:47
to to make it available
45:50
at the same time it can be wielded
45:54
for as leverage by denying people the
45:57
access to it but of course
45:59
the more dominant your position is in in
46:01
terms of um
46:03
having ownership over this technology
46:05
the more leverage you have
46:06
for soft power or for any any sort of
46:09
diplomatic leverage
46:10
um but yes it will definitely play a
46:12
role uh but at the same time
46:15
they're inevitably going to be players
46:17
that are far more powerful and and well
46:18
equipped than we are
46:20
uh seeing us in exactly the same way
46:22
that i just described in relation to
46:24
other countries that we're related to
46:25
wanting to use soft power against so
46:28
so we have to also acknowledge what our
46:29
place in the world is and that we don't
46:31
get to be the pure decision makers on
46:32
our own
46:33
and it's inevitably in some sort of
46:35
cahoots with uh with our lords and
46:37
masters whoever that happens to be
46:39
i might continue on hillary there was a
46:42
gentleman there
46:43
yeah yes
46:56
i wanted to get back to your previous
46:59
question actually
47:00
um you can tell from my accent i'm not
47:02
australian i'm
47:03
french and i'm the scientific attache at
47:06
the french embassy and
47:07
my work is to foster collaboration
47:10
between france and australia
47:12
and uh in certain areas it's very easy
47:14
and in
47:15
quantum it's a bit more complicated uh
47:17
basically because
47:18
very often there are issues of uh
47:21
property intellectual property and so on
47:23
but as you said quantum is is
47:26
applicable in many different domains so
47:29
in your opinion
47:30
what's the the kind of domain where
47:33
international collaboration would be the
47:35
most uh easy to do
47:39
ah personally at the moment i think it's
47:41
still i mean
47:42
quantum key distribution is a bit
47:44
sensitive
47:45
um that kind of technology shows up on
47:49
on non-export lists already
47:52
but generally speaking there's not a
47:54
huge amount of security issues at the
47:57
moment that we find especially with
47:58
countries like france
48:01
we still have active collaborations both
48:03
with
48:04
multiple institutes in france and with
48:05
the startup community that's also
48:07
growing there quite quickly
48:09
um how this changes with your recent
48:11
initiative
48:12
um i don't know i'm not even sure that
48:15
the details have been fully worked out
48:17
yet with this with this new 3 billion
48:19
dollar announcement but our
48:22
our issues with collaboration at the
48:24
moment i don't think is security related
48:26
not yet um especially with the european
48:30
union it's a european union thing
48:32
in the sense that you know once you get
48:36
outside the eu framework
48:38
it's sort of disincentivized for the
48:40
collaborations to be there as
48:41
in the same way you know whether it's
48:43
nationality requirements
48:45
um or whether or not funding across
48:47
borders all that kind of stuff
48:48
so that's much more of an issue at the
48:50
moment we have some
48:52
security concerns at the moment but it's
48:54
only related to certain countries and
48:56
whether or not we can
48:57
basically have students have postdocs or
49:00
have
49:00
academic collaborations with some of
49:03
these countries that are very no go at
49:05
the moment when it comes to any kind of
49:06
technology not just quantum
49:08
but certainly the the collaboration
49:10
bottlenecks at the moment with australia
49:13
is not security related it's more about
49:16
as these
49:17
other entities grow and as other
49:19
countries grow in their investment in
49:20
quantum
49:21
again we're just being shut out we're
49:24
not growing with enough
49:25
comparative funding and with enough
49:27
comparative national coordination to
49:30
make it as attractive anymore as
49:32
say it was 20 years ago 20 years ago we
49:34
get a lot of collaboration with the
49:36
french or with the germans or
49:37
the british because we had an
49:39
exceptional pool of talent here relative
49:41
to our size but now that's diminishing
49:44
i would say that i think one area that
49:47
has
49:47
the most opportunity for useful
49:49
collaboration
49:51
is in establishing standards for
49:53
post-quantum cryptography
49:55
so there was there was a call by uh
49:58
nist in the u.s which handled standards
50:02
for
50:02
cryptography to uh as you know
50:06
to bring in ideas for algorithms
50:09
for things like digital signatures to
50:12
secure transactions
50:13
as well as public key cryptography which
50:16
would be
50:16
secure against quantum computer attacks
50:19
and they've gone through a couple rounds
50:20
and they've
50:21
whittled it down to a few good
50:23
candidates but in the end
50:24
it's going to take an international
50:26
agreement to accept these standards
50:28
and in france in particular has a very
50:31
strong
50:32
cryptographic community and i understand
50:34
that as part of the
50:36
um the postcovid investment into quantum
50:39
a large section of that is actually
50:41
going towards post-quantum cryptography
50:44
um and so uh you know that
50:47
that requires a level of trust between
50:49
nations
50:50
and it also takes a horsepower
50:54
it takes you know people putting a lot
50:56
of brain
50:57
power into trying to attack those
50:59
candidate algorithms
51:02
um to see if they really will withstand
51:05
quantum computer attacks and you know
51:07
there aren't that many people in the
51:08
world that can do this
51:10
so it you know it it takes some kind of
51:13
agreements and a level of trust
51:15
for us to be able to establish those
51:17
standards so that we'll be ready
51:20
and have a secure internet transactions
51:22
when quantum computers do come online
51:25
just um elaborating on what gavin was
51:27
talking about with post quantum crypto
51:29
which is
51:29
classical cryptography that is robust
51:31
against quantum computer attacks
51:33
um uh it makes the interesting point
51:37
that
51:37
this whole discussion about strategy
51:39
isn't limited just to quantum
51:40
technologies
51:41
but also it's interplay with classical
51:43
technology so i raised the
51:45
quantum cryptography uh as a technology
51:48
that offsets the power of quantum
51:50
computers to to crack
51:51
our cryptographic codes well so would
51:54
post quantum classical cryptography
51:56
but we haven't standardized it yet as
51:58
german pointed out
51:59
but that's an example of a purely
52:00
classical theoretical development
52:04
that could have massive implications for
52:06
this whole strategic dynamic
52:07
uh in terms of quantum computers ability
52:09
to to hack our codes
52:12
let's do two questions at a time now and
52:13
see if we can get through let's start
52:15
they're crazy
52:16
um so if we played a card to write and
52:19
developed an effective national strategy
52:21
do you think there's potential that it
52:22
could actually push australia into
52:23
becoming a large economy
52:25
i'll grab that one and then we might do
52:27
one more from the audience was there any
52:29
i did see oh yeah at the frontier
52:30
closing
52:36
thank you i'm actually keen to talk uh
52:38
to get your opinion on the skilled
52:40
workforce coming through like as you
52:41
said you're
52:42
very much focusing on the postgraduate
52:44
undergraduate
52:45
levels but we know that stem uptake at
52:48
schools
52:49
is very low it's dropping physics maths
52:52
advanced maths
52:53
well below you know getting below 10
52:54
percent of students
52:56
gender issues around who's doing the
52:58
maths and
53:00
physics so i'm keen to hear what your
53:01
thoughts are in terms of
53:03
expanding on what's in the report and
53:05
how to attract people to
53:07
um quantum that is perfect because
53:11
that actually duplicates a question
53:13
online and helps me a bit
53:15
tara do we want to let's start with that
53:16
last question with you
53:18
there is a similar question online about
53:20
how do we prepare the next generation to
53:21
understand this is an area worth
53:23
studying so i feel like the two of them
53:24
are
53:25
a good fit do you want to start with
53:26
that one and then we'll move back to the
53:28
other question
53:29
yeah sure so we know that diversity is a
53:32
problem in quantum
53:33
like all the way through from high
53:35
school students to
53:37
to our professors so absolutely a focus
53:40
area to try and increase
53:42
that pipeline in in a number of
53:44
different ways
53:45
in terms of education content one of the
53:48
pilot approaches that we've taken at one
53:50
of the research centers is to work with
53:52
teachers
53:53
to look at the curriculum and try and
53:55
embed
53:56
quantum related units into different
53:58
areas of study
54:01
that seems to be having a little bit of
54:03
early success and that there's interest
54:05
and the students are engaged with it and
54:08
i certainly find that lab tours when
54:10
they do come through with school groups
54:12
are very very enthusiastic back in the
54:14
day when we could have physical
54:15
lab tours so i think it's about really
54:18
looking at that from a national
54:20
perspective
54:20
and then working with the states and
54:22
territories in terms of education
54:24
to to embed um elements of that into
54:27
the curriculum just like we looked at
54:30
you know coding
54:31
for for kids as well so it's just one of
54:33
those subjects that we'll have to kind
54:35
of introduce
54:36
over time
54:39
let's jump here why don't we go straight
54:42
to the question that came in from
54:43
the back who wants to take that one
54:48
can you remember the title uh you know
54:50
you might have to repeat it especially
54:52
for me um it was more just if we
54:55
managed to address the um could we
54:58
become a large economy
55:00
it's hard to predict because uh it's
55:01
hard to predict what fraction of the
55:03
future economy will be quantum related
55:05
if you knew the answer to that then i
55:06
could answer it uh but but certainly
55:10
it's enormously important in making us a
55:13
on a relative basis increasing our
55:15
standing
55:16
um there's certainly no denying that
55:20
you know whoever gets in early in in
55:22
forefront technologies and dominates
55:24
those markets
55:25
they end up becoming hugely powerful
55:27
countries uh
55:28
silicon valley alone can almost
55:30
single-handedly
55:33
explain enormous strategic uh
55:37
power in the united states if they
55:38
didn't have silicon valley
55:40
that they would be nothing compared to
55:41
what they are so
55:43
that's that's exactly why we want to
55:44
foster an ecosystem here at home
55:46
the equivalent of a silicon valley and
55:48
in quantum technologies
55:51
but can we do that given it's it you
55:53
know just
55:54
as you said with your question are we
55:56
pumping enough people through
55:59
universities through the right research
56:00
institutes to study the right things
56:03
but it's not just about pumping out a
56:05
production line of education
56:07
yeah and and doing our normal issue a
56:10
normal business of exporting it back
56:12
overseas and just just taking the money
56:14
associated with educating people
56:16
you also want to make sure that they
56:17
have good reason to stay here and remain
56:19
part of the economy where
56:21
they're using that education which is
56:22
where the real money comes from
56:24
the money doesn't come from selling
56:26
degrees it comes from
56:27
utilizing the education that they're
56:29
provided with and
56:30
that that has to be magnetized yeah
56:32
there's four four people
56:34
four very talented people i can think of
56:35
just from the sydney area who left in
56:37
this past year
56:39
green cobra like flew overseas to take a
56:40
job which wouldn't have been easy either
56:43
okay and with two questions online this
56:45
is a very tough choice here
56:47
let's start with um alexander's he says
56:50
china has made a strong commitment
56:51
specifically to quantum communication
56:53
technologies
56:54
should australia likewise be pursuing a
56:56
specific area of application and if so
56:58
what
56:58
area of application like should it be
57:00
quantum communications for example is
57:02
that's one question
57:03
and then we're going to end on this
57:05
question which is i like this one what
57:07
do you think will be the novel this is
57:08
from james what do you think will be the
57:09
novel in direct benefit of quantum
57:11
technologies that we could use to engage
57:13
the public
57:15
what is the quantum version for example
57:17
of ubereats
57:21
so should we start with the application
57:23
are there applications that australia
57:25
should be focused
57:26
on you know should we be doubling down
57:28
on quantum computing quantum
57:29
communications
57:31
doing a little bit of everything i mean
57:34
the thing is that they're not
57:35
inseparable from one another because
57:38
they naturally feed into one another and
57:39
they're highly overlapping in the
57:40
underlying types of devices that you
57:43
need to need to build um so i wouldn't
57:46
separate them that way
57:47
um but i think it's fair to say that
57:50
quantum computing is
57:52
certainly from an economic and a
57:54
strategic perspective by far the most
57:56
valuable quantum technology that we that
57:58
we have in mind at the moment
58:00
it's also we're not clear yet really
58:02
about whether the approaches that other
58:04
countries are feeding into their
58:06
programs are ultimately going to be the
58:08
best like australia's
58:10
australia's not going to launch a
58:11
satellite constellation for quantum
58:13
we're just not going to do it
58:14
we we don't have the resources to put up
58:18
a satellite quantum constellation like
58:20
china or the us might do but that
58:22
doesn't mean that that's the best way
58:23
for us to do it
58:24
even from a technological standpoint
58:25
there are other methods for quantum
58:26
communications that might
58:28
turn out to be cheaper they might be
58:30
easier to build they might be more
58:31
compatible with quantum computing as
58:33
peter said
58:34
you know fundamentally built from the
58:35
same devices with with very little
58:37
modification
58:38
we still you know have only taken the
58:41
very first step
58:42
um as a world basically in regards to
58:45
quantum technology i mean the biggest
58:47
quantum computing systems are
58:48
50 cubits um they're not very big
58:52
people are not useful yeah i mean people
58:54
often say well
58:55
can you compare where we are with
58:57
quantum to where we work classically and
58:58
you get a range of answers
59:00
when you talk to people in the quantum
59:01
community oh we're at 1972.
59:04
or in 1954 or something like that but
59:07
again
59:07
50 cubits if we want to make the
59:10
equivalent two bits
59:11
okay when do we have 50 bits of
59:13
information
59:14
in some system vacuum tubes transistors
59:18
whatever happens to be you know we're
59:21
i would argue we're not even at the 50s
59:23
yet in regards to all of this
59:25
so it's very very unclear and i suppose
59:28
this leads into the last question i mean
59:30
if you're in 1950 would you predict who
59:33
eats
59:34
would you predict youtube that's not
59:36
what people are thinking about and
59:37
that's not what we're thinking about in
59:38
quantum either
59:39
and we're not predicting quantum uber
59:41
eats either yeah
59:43
i mean it kind of is already sometimes
59:44
your food arrives sometimes it doesn't
59:46
[Laughter]
59:49
but it never does both yeah
59:51
[Laughter]
59:53
all right i feel like that is the
59:54
perfect place to end we've really hit
59:56
um hit the finish line anyway thank you
60:00
very much everyone for joining us both
60:01
here and online
60:02
if we can end by giving our panelists
60:04
and tara up there a round of applause
60:07
that'll be fantastic
60:14
[Music]
60:25
WATCH MORE: Building a strong quantum industry for Sydney | City of Sydney’s Visiting Entrepreneur Program | Hosted by UTS in partnership with Q-CTRL
00:02
Hello all, I am Sarah Kinkel, I'm the Partnerships Manager in the Innovation and Entrepreneurship
00:09
Unit at UTS and on behalf of UTS and Q-CTRL and the City of Sydney we are so delighted
00:16
to welcome you here tonight to our panel, Building a strong quantum future for Sydney.
00:22
Before we start I do want to pay my respects to the traditional custodians of the land on which we
00:30
stand, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, and to acknowledge and pay my respects to their elders
00:36
past present and emerging. So we are so thrilled here at UTS to be participating once again in the
00:44
City of Sydney's Visiting Entrepreneur Program. This is a program that's been ongoing since 2017
00:50
and in that time there's been over 70 events, over 90 partner organisations and I know another
00:56
13 events this year, and it's just such a fantastic program that brings together
01:01
the best of what Sydney has to offer and connects it with, really the best of what the world has to
01:06
offer so it's just an exciting global program and it's so fantastic that it's been able to continue
01:11
even in these trying times. And this year's theme has been about the transformative power
01:17
of deep technology, particularly about quantum and biotechnology and about the new possibilities
01:22
that these technologies will unlock for us. So before we do get started tonight I also wanted
01:28
to alert those of you who are interested that of course this is one of a series of events and there
01:33
are more upcoming. One in particular I wanted to draw your attention to is taking place this
01:39
Thursday on the 10th of June from 6.00 to 7.00. It's free, it's online, words we all like to hear.
01:46
And its title "In science we trust". You'll have the opportunity to join Ilana Wisby the CEO of
01:50
Oxford Quantum Circuits and a panel of thought leaders exploring the many dimensions of ethics
01:55
in a technological world. If you are interested in registering for that you can go to city.sydney/vep
02:04
On that note our hashtag for tonight is #VEPsyd which weirdly did not get updated
02:11
in that slide panel for the people in the room, but it is #VEPsyd. So we are here tonight to talk
02:19
about building a strong quantum future for Sydney, to talk about why this industry matters for Sydney
02:24
and Australia. About the amazing foundations that are being laid now and the great work that's being
02:29
done now today, and about how we can continue building that momentum towards the future.
02:33
So without further ado I'm going to hand over to our panel's moderator Dr Michael Hush the Chief
02:38
Scientific Officer of Q-CTRL to introduce our panellists and take us forward. Thank you Michael.
02:47
Thank you very much for that introduction. So yeah today we're going to talk about building
02:51
a strong quantum industry for Sydney, hopefully going to address some really important questions
02:54
about what's going on right now and what we can do to do better as a city. I'm Dr Michael Hush
03:00
so I'm the Chief Scientific Officer at Q-CTRL. I currently look at all of the research going
03:05
on at that company and I've also actually spent some time as an academic in Australia.
03:09
But today is not about me I'm just a moderator. It's about our fantastic panel which I'd love to
03:13
introduce now. So first we have Chris Ferrie, he's an Associate Professor at the Centre for Quantum
03:18
Software within the University of Technology Sydney where we're currently located. He
03:22
obtained his PhD in quantum information from the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University
03:27
of Waterloo in Canada. He specialises in the theory of quantum characterisation and control,
03:32
and many of his theoretical protocols have moved into practice, being implemented in
03:36
laboratories worldwide. Chris is a gifted scientific communicator having published over
03:40
50 children's books in science, which have been translated into 15 languages and have
03:45
sold more than five million copies worldwide. I have of course here one of his wonderful books,
03:51
not set up at all! Quantum Computing for Babies, which I highly recommend that
03:55
you have take a look at it at your closest bookstore if they still exist.
04:01
Then Chris is a creator of many of our educational innovations in quantum science
04:05
in both the classroom and out, and he is actually a quantum education advisor at Q-CTRL.
04:11
Next on our panel we have Biliana Rajevic. Biliana leads the development and implementation of Sydney
04:17
Quantum Academy's engagement strategy. She has worked in both large global organisations,
04:23
boutique firms, and startups in New York, London, and Sydney. She has more than 20 years
04:27
experience spanning investment banking, investor relations and software development products.
04:32
Prior to SQA Biliana was on the leadership team of an Australian AI startup leading corporate
04:37
and technology partnerships, GTM execution and capital raising, and Biliana received her
04:42
MBA degree from Cornell University. She also has a book coming out... no, that's [laughs]
04:50
But she's got a great amount of expertise both outside of simply the academic sector but also
04:56
crossing between the two, so it's really great to have here as well.
04:59
Next we have Nathan Langford. Nathan Langford is an ARC Future Fellow and Associate Professor in
05:05
the Faculty of Science at UTS, where he leads a research group on quantum circuit science at UTS,
05:11
and a new state-of-the-art cryogenic facility for studying superconducting quantum processes.
05:16
Nathan is also in the Centre for Quantum Software and Information. After graduating from his PhD at
05:21
the University of Queensland in 2007, Nathan worked in leading experimental quantum science
05:26
research groups across Europe before returning to Australia to take up a lecturing position
05:30
and Future Fellowship at UTS. He has a broad background in quantum technologies ranging across
05:35
widely different experimental platforms as well as theoretical research, and his research currently
05:40
focuses on superconducting quantum processes to simulate exotic physical systems. Nathan is also a
05:46
keen science communicator and was once runner-up on "I'm a scientist get me out of here". It's
05:50
great to have you on the panel of course Nathan. Superconducting cubits are such a big topic as
05:54
well in quantum computing, so it's great to have that expertise. And next we have Michael Biercuk,
06:00
he is the CEO and Founder of Q-CTRL, a quantum technology company and a Professor of quantum
06:05
physics and quantum technology at the University of Sydney. In his academic position he leads a
06:10
research team as Chief Investigator in the ARC Centre of Excellence for Engineered
06:14
Quantum Systems exploring the role of control engineering and quantum coherent systems.
06:20
Michael earned his undergraduate degree from the university of Pennsylvania and his Master's and
06:24
PhD from Harvard University. He has a research fellowship in the Ion Storage Group at NIST,
06:29
Boulder and has served as a full-time technical consultant for DARPA, helping to steer government
06:34
investments in quantum information and advanced computer architectures. Michael is also a SXSW
06:40
and TEDx presenter alumnus, with a multi-time Australian Museum Eureka prize nominee and winner.
06:47
Great to have you here Mike. And finally we have Simon Devitt. Simon Devitt is a Senior Lecturer in
06:52
the Centre for Quantum Software and Information at the University of Technology Sydney, and
06:57
Co-Founder and Managing Director of the quantum technology consulting firm H-bar. Completing
07:02
his PhD in 2008 in quantum engineering he has held research positions at the University of Cambridge,
07:07
the Japanese National Institute of Informatics, Keio University, and Japanese National Lens,
07:12
Riken. His expertise is in quantum computing and communications, architecture design, quantum error
07:17
correction and quantum algorithm compilation. He has worked with numerous corporations and VC firms
07:22
on their expansion into the quantum technology space, and advised multiple government agencies
07:27
on multi-award, million-dollar R&D initiatives. In 2021 he was awarded the inaugural Warren Prize
07:33
from the Royal Society of NSW for his service to global quantum computing development.
07:37
Great to have you here as well Simon. So we clearly have quite a range of expertise
07:41
in the panel, from everything from industry through to academia to the bridges between.
07:46
But enough from me, let's say some things from the panel.
07:49
So the first question, which I'd like to get perspective from both Mike and Simon,
07:54
who might give us the kind of experimental versus theory side is, what is quantum technology?
08:01
I assume this is on, oh yes it is. Everyone's holding quantum technology in their pocket.
08:06
Every single phone you have, every single watch you have, everything's
08:10
all based on quantum technology. We sort of make this distinction now we try to sort of
08:15
tell people, sort of lead them into what quantum technology is by making the distinction of the
08:18
quantum technology that exists in the 20th century and the quantum technology that we're all trying
08:22
to build now in the 21st century. So 20th century quantum technologies you're all familiar with.
08:28
Transistors, they only work because of quantum mechanics. The laser only works because of
08:33
quantum mechanics. Medical imaging, MRIs only work because of quantum mechanics, but they're working
08:40
basically through the quantum mechanical effect of billions upon billions upon billions of atoms.
08:46
The actual properties that they have and how these things act as say switches
08:50
in the context of transistors occurs because of quantum mechanical properties, but we're
08:55
not exploiting quantum mechanical properties directly. Whereas the second generation of quantum
09:00
technology that we will work on, whether it's computing, communication sensing, what have you,
09:05
this is all based upon exploiting the actual rules of quantum mechanics at the subatomic level,
09:10
whether it's atoms, whether it's particles of light, and that opens up a range of possibilities
09:16
in computing, sensing and communications that just isn't possible
09:21
when you think about classical transistors or the digital world that came about in the 20th century.
09:25
This is why it's so interesting and so important in this century that this
09:29
technology is actually moving forward because the first generation of quantum technologies led
09:33
to the digital revolution, so what's the second generation of quantum technologies going to do?
09:41
Hello, let me let me give a couple of additional perspectives. Obviously everything that Simon has
09:48
said is almost verbatim what I would say in this kind of setting, except much more
09:53
eloquent than I would. I think, here's an analogy to try to bring home that point.
10:00
The way we build technology today, by analogy, is a little bit like building a sand sculpture.
10:08
We take a giant pile of stuff and if we learn the right rules we can shape the
10:12
stuff into the form that we want. Whether you're a really skilled artist and you shape that into
10:19
you know, a sculpture of an amazing castle, or Freud and his patient in a sand sculpture
10:25
you know, you're always still using the properties of the big pile of stuff.
10:32
And so it shouldn't escape your understanding that if instead of looking at the giant pile
10:36
of stuff and what you can do with it, if instead you look at the single grains of sand
10:41
you'll see that when you look closely enough, it's not just a homogeneous pile of tan sand, instead
10:48
you see that there's a new level of complexity that was just not visible to you when you only
10:53
look at the giant pile. When you look at the individual grains you see that some are seashell
10:57
and some are stone, some are transparent, some are opaque, some are rough, some are very smooth
11:03
and absolutely none of that is visible to you when you only look at the giant pile of stuff.
11:08
And so the transition that we're making that Simon alluded to of what we talk about now
11:12
in the 21st century of quantum technology, is about looking at the individual grains of sand
11:17
and building technology from the individual grains of sand. Those are the individual
11:21
quantum mechanical systems. In the 1980s and the 1990s we learned that you could
11:27
get down to isolate individual grains of sand in this analogy. Individual atoms,
11:33
individual elements of electrical circuits that obey the rules of quantum mechanics.
11:38
And what we've been working on since then, is putting that phenomenology, all the complexity
11:44
we find when we look closely enough to work. Now let me expand one step further on Simon's comment.
11:51
in addition to things like lasers and transistors and computers, there is actually one bit of
11:58
quantum technology that meets the definition that I think all of us would use for this 21st
12:02
century or second quantum revolution which has in fact already changed your life, and that is GPS.
12:08
GPS works because of atomic clocks. Atomic clocks give us a very very stable tick that comes from
12:16
inside the atom and we can only, only access that tick if we use quantum mechanics to do so.
12:26
Now just think about how GPS has changed your life, did you get here using
12:29
Google Maps? Did you use an Uber? Think about all the location-based services that are tied
12:35
back to this first true application of what we would collectively call quantum technology.
12:42
That's just the first thing that we thought of right? And now
12:45
our interest in our excitement is about everything else that we can build from there.
12:53
Those are some great answers, and again that's, I think it's the first time I've heard an
12:57
explanation of quantum technology without jargon like entanglement, superposition and coherence
13:01
so great work there. Trying to continue that theme of accessibility so everyone has an idea
13:06
I think another really great way to understand how quantum technologies affects us is talk about
13:11
applications. So for the rest of the panel, would you mind telling us about what particular quantum
13:16
technology has an application that you're really excited about? Nathan you wanna go
13:20
first? All right. Okay, so I think for me, the most exciting quantum technology applications
13:30
will be those that arise out of quantum computing and in particular to use quantum computers
13:37
to model the behaviour of really complex physical systems. So it turns out
13:44
that modelling a large chemical or biological molecule, or an exotic material like novel
13:54
superconductors, is actually something that's really super hard to do on a traditional computer
14:01
and in fact a significant fraction of the world's annual supercomputing capacity
14:09
gets used to do exactly this sort of in-silico molecular modelling every year.
14:15
But because quantum physics underpins and drives a lot of the key properties of these sorts of
14:22
systems, it turns out that quantum computers are actually really well placed to take up this
14:32
challenge, and in fact do it a hell of a lot more efficiently than a traditional computer,
14:39
and the potential payoff here is really huge. Imagine if you could find a more efficient way
14:46
to make fertiliser than the century-old harbour process
14:50
that's still in use and consumes some few percent of the world's global annual carbon budget.
14:59
Or imagine if you could dramatically reduce the amount of time
15:03
and money it takes to develop and test new vaccines and new therapeutic drugs
15:11
by using a quantum computer to artificially test, to simulate and test these new potential molecules
15:22
and chemicals that people want to use in these contexts, and in doing so cut out
15:28
a huge amount of the expensive labor-intensive and you know, necessarily hit-and-miss lab synthesis
15:38
and testing that costs a huge amount of money for the pharmaceutical industry every year.
15:44
And that's the sort of area where we hope quantum computing can take us.
15:49
So Biliana are you all so excited about quantum computing, or a different technology?
15:55
What I'm excited about is a little bit of what Nathan touched on
15:59
something that is near and dear to my heart, is the life sciences industry and the potential
16:04
of faster drug development and the trickle-down effect that that can then have on the society
16:10
for people getting life-saving treatments or affording life-saving treatments in time.
16:14
And also the idea of potential personalised medicine therapies. Chris what are you
16:21
thinking? Yeah so I mean obviously I agree. I think when we, the typical answer you hear is
16:31
that quantum computers will be used to solve kind of abstract problems, like maybe we'll
16:34
multiply matrices faster, or it could help with machine learning and I think that may be true but
16:42
it's these spin-off effects like when the first atomic clock was invented, nobody thought that
16:49
what we really want is Uber, nobody thought that that's what we were planning on doing, right? So,
16:55
and it's not us, it's not the people deep into the research that it's going to come up but those
17:00
ideas, it's it's going to be the community of people that come into the field afterward or now
17:07
that come up with these ideas and applications that we could never dream of because we're deep
17:11
in the weeds trying to multiply numbers faster. And one of the other points that I wanted to
17:18
make about physics, if you think about what we're trying to do, we're going to build a device and
17:28
it's going to be a device that we can't really explain the inner workings of in great detail.
17:36
A quantum computer will be a black box and you can't look in the box,
17:39
if you look in the box you'll break the computation. So what's in the box will be
17:45
a new state of matter something new in the world that's never existed before,
17:50
that we will have created, and I think that's a really interesting thing to think about, that a
17:56
lot of the technology that we've created over the past was to help us go out and explore the world,
18:02
and these technologies were great at going out and seeing what was already there. Whereas now
18:08
we're going to build and design the world at the most fundamental level and what we find there
18:16
may be incredible, it will certainly be a paradigm shift in all of science. So that's what I'm most
18:22
excited about. I just wanted to pick up one one extra thing to drive home this point about,
18:27
you know the unknown applications being maybe the most exciting. The first digital
18:32
electronic computer was called the ENIAC that was at the University of Pennsylvania,
18:36
it's the first computer that really looks like the computers we use today. It had digital encoding,
18:42
the encoding was electronic, now that the hardware was different obviously. It was publicly
18:48
released in 1947 but the spec for it was like 1943, that's when the money started coming
18:54
into Pen' to build it. Anybody know what the application that they proposed was? It was only
18:59
one, it was only one application for the world's first computer, first electronic digital computer.
19:06
Calculating artillery shell trajectories. That was the only thing anybody thought was valuable enough
19:12
to build what is now the information revolution, right? And so I think, you know, we have really
19:20
exciting ideas about things to do with quantum computers but I think they're they're going to
19:25
look pretty silly in 30 or 40 or 50 years when we start actually running these things at scale.
19:33
Just following up on that, I think one of the really interesting things about
19:37
exactly this point with quantum computing is that quantum computing, quantum computers as
19:43
Chris was saying, are kind of the ultimate in complex matter systems, and in some sense
19:51
one of the big challenges about building a quantum computer is you can't know what's going on inside
19:58
otherwise you break it, and and for a quantum computer to be interesting it has to get big
20:04
enough that it's doing stuff you can't do on a traditional computer. So kind of by definition if
20:11
we build this quantum computer large enough to be interesting we are not going to be able to easily
20:17
predict and know what is going to happen with the understanding that we have at the moment.
20:25
And this is going to require a completely new way of looking at it, a completely new breed of
20:31
programmers and data analysts to both control and then analyse what's coming out of these machines.
20:44
And that's going to be, I mean that's something that we can't possibly know about, like
20:48
that's something that's going to happen and emerge over the next few decades, I guess.
20:55
So there were some amazing applications there,
20:57
from health to other unknown applications as well .
21:01
I'm gonna ask this question to the two people who have companies which are based around quantum,
21:06
the quantum technologies. I'm sure this is a question you both relish and loathe, but
21:11
when will we see the benefits that we've been just described,
21:15
what is the time horizon for these outcomes? That's to Mike and Simon.
21:21
Well I mean Mike already alluded to it, we already have. We already have seen the benefits
21:26
when it comes to atomic clocks, timing standards which leads to GPS. Now hidden within that
21:33
question is when are quantum computers going to display benefits? That's what people are really
21:38
asking, when is a quantum computer going to be something that's going to be useful
21:42
for any kind of commercial or scientifically useful application. Again it kind of
21:49
it kind of misses the point, because building a machine that can give Summit,
21:56
the supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Labs are run for their money, in any computation is
22:01
that a benefit? I think it is. This is the Google supremacy result that was done a couple years ago,
22:07
50 quantum bits gave the world's largest supercomputer that is used for nuclear weapons
22:12
calculations a run for its money. I think that's a benefit already. It's already telling us how to
22:17
engineer these systems and it's now gotten to the stage you know, I've been in quantum computing for
22:23
about 15 years now, it's now routine. It used to be to build a qubit in the lab was a major
22:29
effort for a new academic that was starting up. These days you can order them online just about.
22:35
Okay that's a benefit in my mind. When the systems are going to get large enough that they're going
22:39
to become commercially competitive, that Pfizer or General Motors or GEE is actually going to be
22:46
buying super computing time on quantum computers to do their calculations, I mean you get a range
22:51
of answers depending on who you're talking to. If you're talking to people with companies they'll
22:56
put the timeline a bit shorter than people are in academia, but nobody knows, nobody really knows.
23:01
We're hoping to see good commercial applications or at least demonstrations of the building blocks
23:06
of commercial applications within this decade. Now I don't want to speculate anywhere beyond that.
23:12
I mean who the hell knows we could all be gone by the end of this decade
23:17
so you know, but I'm a pessimistic guy. [Laughter] Are you really? I think maybe a different way of
23:29
phrasing the question is like, when do we expect some company to make
23:35
ungodly amounts of money from the work that they're doing building some quantum thing?
23:42
You know Simon is quite right that you get more pessimistic answers from academics on average,
23:47
you get more optimistic answers from industrialists on average you know it's
23:52
a little bit like picking stocks, the reality is nobody knows if it's going to go up or down,
23:56
nobody exactly knows as Simon was saying what the timing is going to be. I mean based on the
24:01
pace of progress that I have seen based on my time building quantum computers for the last 21 years
24:06
and the time that I spent in government supporting this I legitimately think that we're getting to
24:12
the point where in the like five to eight year time horizon, we're going to start to see quantum
24:16
computers that outperform, you know, conventional machines for tasks that people care about.
24:22
Right? There are scientifically interesting tasks like the quantum supremacy experiment that have
24:26
indirect benefits, and then there is the like, when do I design a drug on a quantum computer?
24:32
You know, that threshold I think is in this five to eight year timeline. But what to me is
24:36
also exciting is that everything we're learning about building quantum computers actually falls
24:40
into another category of applications that we don't hear as much about it's not a sexy
24:45
called quantum sensing, which is taking the fact that quantum hardware is really really fragile.
24:49
One reason it's really hard to build these big systems is that it breaks very easily, right,
24:53
it just turns back into garbage. Well you can kind of turn that on its head, you can use that as as a
24:59
benefit, as a technological capability to detect very small signals. In particular very small
25:05
magnetic signatures, maybe you want to do mining exploration, very small gravitational signatures,
25:10
turns out you can measure ocean currents directly, you can map ocean currents with
25:16
gravity from space. Right? And so quantum sensors that leverage this weakness as a strength,
25:24
given application or given opportunity for applications that deliver on your time scales, and
25:28
the reason is that very coarsely a quantum sensor is a lot like a one quantum bit quantum computer,
25:34
it's like a quantum computer with one element, and we're really good as Simon was just saying,
25:38
even at making them in like the most junior academics intro lab, they they can make a qubit
25:44
and we know a lot about how to manipulate them and operate them, and so I'm particularly bullish on
25:49
this next few years about the emergence of quantum sensing applications for a range of activities and
25:55
in particular we focus in Q-CTRL on navigation, building new kinds of navigation technologies that
26:01
work in the absence of GPS, so do, it's called "dead reckoning navigation", measure where you're
26:07
going and where you are even without a GPS beacon. Right, I think that's great to like hear about the
26:13
timelines I think we've established pretty clearly now what the quantum technologies are and their
26:17
applications. Let's bring it down to a smaller scale now and talk about the city of Sydney.
26:22
I think this question is best for Biliana. So you've got expertise at the Sydney Quantum Academy
26:26
of sitting in between, in Sydney sitting in between industry and academia. So what would you
26:32
say are the current advantages that Sydney as a city has in the quantum space? Yeah so I think one
26:37
of the things that many people don't realise, that Sydney has one of the highest concentration if not
26:43
the highest concentration of quantum scientists and talent in the world ranging from experts with
26:51
decades of experience, to early and mid-career researchers, to PhD students and also the emerging
26:58
talent at the undergraduate level. Last year UNSW was the first university in the world
27:05
to offer a Bachelor's of Engineering undergraduate degree in quantum engineering. And then you have
27:12
the organisation like the Sydney Quantum Academy where the quantum community is banded together,
27:17
together with the NSW Government to show their support of continuing to develop this PhD talent.
27:25
Plus we are looking for ways to actually help upscale the entire,
27:30
you know corporate workforce at various levels, and none of this would be possible if we didn't
27:36
have this deep expertise on the ground. Yeah I think that's a really good
27:40
foundation and I'll kind of broaden out the question of the rest of the panel,
27:44
really to the core question that I wanted to ask today about how how we as a city of Sydney can do
27:52
better to grow our quantum industry. So this is a question for everybody.
27:57
There's a lot of emphasis on industry academic collaborations and policy
28:01
is this the right end result we should be targeting? Are there good examples worth emulating
28:06
out there already? And how can Sydney do better? Do you want to volunteer to go first, Nathan?
28:14
Yeah this is a really interesting question I think. For me, quantum technology
28:21
is something that really exemplifies the very definition of a deep tech
28:27
development field, and by deep tech what I mean is a field which really combines critical elements
28:37
from bleeding edge research science, and big tech scale engineering development. And that means that
28:47
on their own a research scientist would really have no hope of trying to build a quantum computer
28:54
without the, sort of, the scale and the investment and the process optimisation that industry can
29:03
help bring to the table. But at the same time you can give us all of the undergraduate engineering
29:12
graduates in the world, and without the world's best research scientists
29:21
being able to bring those conceptual shifts and the really transformative, out-of-the-box
29:31
innovation that you get from pursuing those tangential research paths, the industry actually
29:38
really struggles to follow, when you're developing a product it's really hard to, kind of follow all
29:46
the tangents. And that's absolutely critical in this space at the moment, and we're really seeing
29:53
exactly this interaction at the moment in our field. What started as basically an academic
30:00
pursuit in the mid 1990s, is now getting huge interest from industry around the world. And I
30:09
think in my field, my particular experimental area there's a really good example of this,
30:15
which is that John Martinez at the University of California Santa Barbara
30:24
had like, he's really one of the key founders of the area of superconducting electronic circuits
30:31
for quantum information processing, and about 10 years ago Google effectively adopted his
30:39
entire research group into Google. [Michael: "Bought"] Yeah bought, and
30:47
you know, they were already doing amazing science in the Martinez Group
30:52
but since they joined Google it's been really exciting to see
30:57
the transformation they have taken to the next level, where the the sort of stuff
31:03
that they can do is really is changed by the fact that they're now embedded
31:09
in the sort of massive corporate machinery that a company like Google can bring to the table.
31:16
But even though this is kind of the fairy tale story
31:19
of academia/industry collaboration in some sense, I guess I would say that maybe this is
31:26
not the example that we want to follow, that we should be trying to follow. I mean
31:31
let's face it how many Googles are there? How many groups, academic research groups
31:36
are there like John Martinez's group? This is a really really hard thing to replicate.
31:42
So actually I think I would argue that one of the things we should be trying to do really really
31:50
hard especially in Sydney and around the world, is that we should be trying to
31:58
really strongly support the academic groups at this point, because as industry expands
32:06
they are going to need, like industry needs people and that's great for all the academics and
32:11
research students to have possibilities to go off and join really exciting companies and stuff
32:17
but as industry expands, so is going to expand their need for more talent, and if we don't
32:25
really strongly try to expand the support for academic research groups,
32:30
then what starts as a, you know a healthy flow of people from academia to industry,
32:36
could become an exodus that could be really damaging, and I think that as I said before,
32:42
deep tech really needs the sort of, the slightly less constrained research paths and
32:48
the more out-of-the-box thinking that you're able to pursue as an academic researcher,
32:54
and then that's a really critical thing to bring to the table for quantum technologies and quantum
32:58
industries for the coming decades. So I actually think we should be really strongly trying to
33:03
expand our support for young, up-and-coming researchers in the academic space. People who,
33:12
and the last thing I'll say is like, the people who will be making the discoveries in 10 to 20
33:16
years that will be really profoundly changing the path towards quantum computing they're
33:21
not going to be people, I don't think, who are currently working in the big current groups now.
33:27
They're going to be people who've come through groups that haven't even been established yet.
33:31
And this is why I think it's really important to support the young people coming through.
33:36
Do you want to give a point for that Mike, from your industry's perspective?
33:39
I will give a point from an industry perspective, it is not a counterpoint. I think, so the first
33:45
thing is, Nathan hit the nail on the head with one thing, but I wanted to give some context why does
33:50
this question come up a lot, it's because this is a policy question. What should the government be
33:56
doing? What should the government be investing in? And right now the government in Australia
34:00
is pushing very hard on uh supporting industry academic collaboration, right? Now my personal
34:06
view is that this is focusing on the means and not the end. The end that we want is a vibrant
34:13
industrial you know R&D and technology sector, where science turns into products and outcomes,
34:21
right, that's what we want, and I think we've narrowly focused on one mechanism to support that.
34:28
Now the other thing is you don't make industry policy by looking at Facebook, right? You don't
34:33
look at that and say, oh we're just going to make more of that, right? You may say, well we'd love
34:37
to have more companies of that scale, we'd love to have more companies that are as successful,
34:42
have the same market cap, but you don't look at the outlier and say we're going
34:45
to make policy around that. You try to make policy that has broad-based impact, and in my
34:52
view when we look at industry and academia and collaboration in particular in Australia, the
34:57
the policy perspective is is quite simplistic, and it's really like, on a scale of like, smart
35:09
to dumb you have academia, then there's this like clear threshold and then you have industry above.
35:16
That's the policy perspective. Industrialists, they're dumb, academics are smart but academics
35:21
are also if you make another access that goes the other way from like impact, high impact to low
35:26
impact it goes the opposite direction, academics have no impact, industrialists have big impact,
35:31
it's completely stupid but this is the perspective. And so I think we need to change the
35:36
narrative to make sure that people understand that it's not just like you take some people from the
35:40
smart category and some people from the not smart but high impact category and you put them together
35:45
and everything gets fixed. Instead we have to look at like how different industry is. Yes you
35:50
have rent seekers who make money by investing in property just before there's a development
35:56
application that builds a train line nearby, you have plenty of that and we can't fix that.
36:00
But you also have companies like Simon's company, like my company that are research driven, and I
36:06
would say the reality is we don't, in air quotes, we don't "need" industry collaboration, just like
36:13
successful research groups like Nathan's don't "need" industry money, right? There can be
36:18
circumstances where it's beneficial but just saying, well all we're going to do is focus on
36:24
the the engagement and the collaboration part and then everything else will take care of itself,
36:28
it ignores reality, it ignores the fact that these programs like the CRC Scheme have been around for
36:33
decades and have not fixed the problem. The ARC Linkage program has been around for a number
36:38
of years and has not moved the needle at all on improving commercialisation outcomes. So,
36:43
you know they talk about the definition of madness, this discussion falls into that category,
36:48
so I think we need to elevate the level of discussion and look at a diversity of ways
36:54
to support both the industrial research and the commercialisation,
36:58
as well as providing robust support for fundamental exploratory science.
37:05
I mean Michael's completely right in this. There is a real problem at the policy level
37:10
as to industry engagement; industry engagement, we don't care how, we don't care why, we don't care
37:15
any kind of details it's just industry engagement, and it ends up being a focus of academics as to
37:20
who you can engage with and what companies you can deal, with but in the quantum space I always like
37:25
to point out when I'm talking about this, is that while the industry side and the corporate side
37:31
and the VC side might be the most visible, it's not the most heavily invested part of quantum.
37:37
Governments still vastly vastly outweigh the funding that's coming into the quantum sector,
37:43
I mean just in the last year we've had the French announce a three billion
37:49
dollar initiative, we've had the Germans announced two billion dollar initiative, we've had the Dutch
37:52
announce a billion dollar initiative. The dutch, this is a country of the same size as us, the same
37:58
GDP as us, the same very very good talent base as us, and they've already got a one billion dollar
38:04
European Union international initiative but they still thought, well we'll throw another billion
38:09
dollars into this. Australia did a very very good job in the late 90s and early to late 2000s
38:17
really punching above our weight, that's why we have such a strong talent pool in Sydney
38:21
and throughout the country, but as Biliana said, Sydney's got a very very high concentration, that
38:25
was because of Australia making a dedicated choice early on to say, no we will fund this, but the
38:31
rest of the world is ramping up, the rest of the world is saying, no we're going to go 10x we're
38:34
going to go 100x on top of the funding that we put in the early 2000s, and Australia is sitting
38:40
here twiddling its thumbs. Now the industry only comes, the startups only come when you're sitting
38:45
there and you've got a good talent base that are sitting there and you've got basically a surplus,
38:50
and we don't really encourage spin-outs very much in Australia, I mean the quantum spin-outs,
38:56
you know not counting H-bar because we don't do technology we're a consultancy firm,
39:01
but if companies actually building stuff there's Q-CTRL, there's SQC, there's Quantum Brilliance,
39:09
Quintessence doing communications, and then a few companies doing peripheral technologies, sort of
39:15
support technologies or device technologies. That's quite bad considering the impact that
39:20
we had in the early 2000s. And if you just look at the Australians scattered far and wide, I mean
39:26
talk about industry collaborations I mean it's industry poaching, I mean the University of
39:30
Sydney lost two faculty members just in the last six months to Amazon, who knows if that's the
39:36
end of it. That's the industry collaboration that we're seeing. Now for the researchers it's great,
39:43
you go join one of these big corporates, you get a salary bump, you might get to go back home,
39:47
but certainly I don't want that. I'd like it to happen here in Sydney because I like Australia
39:55
but I'd much rather see us grow as the rest of the world is growing on this stuff, and then
40:00
foster these kind of spin outs or these industry collaborations just as a natural consequence,
40:04
rather than insisting that without any government support everyone must have an industry partner,
40:10
which just doesn't work. I mean at UTS QSI for example we do quantum algorithm development.
40:16
Nobody in our centre is really keen on industry collaboration because it doesn't
40:21
match our research programs, the people who are doing algorithm development at UTS
40:25
are not really interested in what's going to happen in the next three
40:29
or four years and optimising financial portfolios, that's not their interest,
40:33
that's not what they're trained to do, so there is this issue. Can I say, and that's okay.
40:40
We need people who think on 30 and 40 and 50-year time scales, I mean I run a company,
40:46
I'm an industrialist I have a short-term time horizon and I need people like Simon who say
40:51
what are we going to do with this technology that you're enabling in 40 years, right?
40:55
If we don't have this diversity of time scales in our R&D portfolio everything falls apart. And
41:00
what's really important to add to what Simon said, is that the people at UTS who are working on this
41:05
stuff, they're like world leading in this area. This is not people who are doing something that's
41:12
not considered important or like, they are really at the head of the game, but it's just they're
41:19
playing a game as Mike said that's two decades down the time horizon. Chris did you want to
41:25
make a comment? You are one of the people that they're talking about right now as someone who's
41:28
at UTS working with industry today. Yeah I think that something practical for me and it sounds like
41:37
that would help with a lot of these problems is bringing in students at the undergraduate level.
41:46
I don't have enough PhD students to send out into industry, how do I get them? Well right now they
41:53
can't come from overseas, so where are they going to come from? They need to come from Australia.
41:58
so we need to get high school students, people that want to upskill into our
42:04
undergraduate programs, UNSW has an undergraduate program in engineering and quantum computing,
42:10
UTS has an undergraduate program, you can get a bachelor of computer science
42:14
with a major in quantum information science at UTS. We need people into these programs and
42:21
where they will go from there, they might come and join our research groups, they might go and join
42:28
companies, but we just don't have enough of those people there, so we need to somehow
42:35
encourage, incentivise people at that low level, and this isn't going to solve the
42:40
problem today or tomorrow but an undergraduate degree is only four years, so we can solve,
42:46
start to look forward to this problem being solved four or five years from now if we can get students
42:50
today in into these programs. And for those students it's probably worth saying that,
42:55
I mean quantum technologies is, you know it could be a bit like the NASA space program,
43:01
there's a lot of stuff that can come out of this, even if you train and you get a degree bachelor of
43:05
computer science and quantum information science, that doesn't mean that that's the thing that you
43:10
have to do for the rest of the career. You're going to be getting a huge amount of really
43:14
useful skills that will be, you know we don't know what the spin outs are going to be, that are going
43:20
to arise from this massive research program that's happening. So there's a huge horizon there. Yeah I
43:25
mean, I don't think you can find an example of someone who got a degree in quantum computing
43:31
and didn't end up being successful. Getting a technical degree is pretty much a guarantee
43:38
for, you know employment or probably happiness I think? We're all pretty happy. I mean yeah we
43:45
all got degrees in quantum computing 10 years ago I think... Before we get too philosophical about
43:51
the decisions I've made in my life, I've noticed a theme that's developing, we really are talking a
43:55
lot about how industry and academia are connected through the talent ,the talent that goes through.
44:00
So I have like another question for Biliana, how do we build wider quantum literacy and the right
44:07
talent pipeline to support both researchers and entrepreneurs? Yeah so I think you can
44:12
end up with a wide spectrum of quantum literacy and I think we have to as educators think about
44:18
how can we develop the right talent for their, I mean the right content for the right people.
44:24
The CEOs and the CEO and the board level, what do they need to know in order to understand how
44:30
this emerging technology is going to transform their industry, their company, their workforce
44:36
and how can they continue to drive change with the organisation? The classical developer, how
44:43
do they need to be retrained to have the right future technical skills? People working in quantum
44:51
adjacent industries or people working at, you know companies such as Q-CTRL who are not quantum
44:56
scientists but who are always working with them, what level of knowledge do we need to get them at?
45:02
And then how do we deliver this? You know, how, what's the right mixture of in-person teaching
45:08
versus online? You know, how do people ingest knowledge and information nowadays? Look it's
45:15
definitely a tall order for the educators, but I think that's okay this is, this is a long-term
45:21
game. And then to your point earlier in terms of we need to look at the top of the funnel,
45:25
how do we entice people to actually study these subjects? And I think one of the things we need
45:29
to do is we need to demonstrate, as much as you don't want to work with collaborative industry or,
45:36
looking at the term [Simon: I did not say, I did not say I didn't want to [laughter], I collaborate
45:39
with industry all the time] We need to make clear connections between what you're studying today
45:45
and there's going to be a job there waiting for you, four to five years from today, not just in
45:50
academia but with industry, and for that we need these collaborations to actually explore these
45:56
future use cases so that companies are going to understand what are the skills they need
46:02
to look for and hire for, four, five, ten years from now. Yeah let me, I'll pick up on that and
46:09
I'll actually highlight a relationship that Q-CTRL has with Chris, I mean it was it was highlighted
46:13
before that Chris is a quantum education advisor, Chris is an academic at UTS. Q-CTRL has a lot
46:21
of talent in web development and professional software engineering and back-end engineering
46:26
and product engineering and product design and user experience and user interface design,
46:30
and we decided to get together and build something kind of new and different, and that is an EdTech
46:38
tool that leverages the best practice in product design and user experience, but is informed by
46:46
education and education focused research. I mean maybe do you want to say something about some of
46:50
the content development that we're doing together? Yeah so I think this is a great point and I think
46:55
it hits upon a lot of things, like one of them is that when we think about the collaboration
47:02
between researchers and industry in deep tech we imagine like, there's geniuses that are gonna go
47:10
behind some lab door and they're gonna, you know that's the only way in which we could collaborate.
47:16
But there's lots of ways to collaborate and one of the ways in which we're collaborating is providing
47:22
new innovations in quantum education, and before I said you know, what I want is students but
47:30
you know, that's putting my academic hat on because that's what we do right? We
47:34
work at a university and we need students to pay fees so that the university can bear salaries,
47:40
but also to help us do research, that's just one side of it right? But everyone can and should
47:47
be educated in quantum technology, just like I teach my children how to code, I teach toddlers
47:53
my toddler how to code with a little robot and a little thing right, you could have said the same
48:00
thing about conventional computing 50, 60 years ago, saying you know, it it takes experts and
48:08
people with a lot of expertise to do this. 60, 70 years later we're not teaching toddlers to do it.
48:14
So we can do this but we need innovations and that's what what we're doing at Q-CTRL with this
48:22
collaboration is coming up with new innovations to teach not just students not just experts
48:31
about quantum technology and quantum computing. Yeah an important point is that we're trying to
48:35
leverage the expertise of both sides. Chris is an expert in the science communication part,
48:39
I mean he's obviously an expert in research as well, in the content, what should be taught,
48:43
how do you teach it in an effective way. We are experts in building products, right? And I can
48:48
tell you from my time in universities dealing with web interfaces like Sydney student for you know,
48:53
online student management, that universities are not good at product development right?
48:57
they're not good at software engineering. And so this is an opportunity where we bring kind
49:01
of the best of both worlds and then we end up testing the new technical product
49:07
in an education setting, we'll be using it in UTS's coursework in the future right? It's a
49:12
really cool example of a collaboration that is more than just, you know "we buy your science".
49:18
Maybe or "we buy your education" right? Maybe there's one last thing that we can
49:22
to add to all of these I mean these are all great points, but one thing that's particularly
49:28
important for Sydney I think, so I'm going to use a buzzword and if you've ever written a
49:32
grant application or something then then you will know this buzzword is vital importance
49:38
to your survival and that's interdisciplinarity, and it gets applied everywhere. But the thing is
49:44
that quantum technologies is one of the most interdisciplinary fields that's out there okay.
49:53
Vital to our survival, you know started out as mostly physicists but now we have engineers,
50:00
we have computer scientists, we have mathematicians, we have chemists,
50:04
we have financial analysts now getting involved, it really is massively multi-disciplinary, and
50:11
one of the super exciting things about Sydney is that we actually cover a huge amount of this space
50:21
in one place. We have experimentalists and theorists, we have people from lots of
50:27
different experimental platforms, we have computer scientists, mathematicians, chemists, physicists,
50:32
engineers all working at world leading levels in this area. And one of the key things if you want
50:38
to get people involved in the industry and bring in the talent and improve the quantum literacy,
50:45
is you have to talk across these disciplines, and one of the really huge challenges when you're
50:51
working in the science research space is when you have to, you know be a physicist and start talking
50:57
to a microwave engineer, you're using completely different language. And we're getting this,
51:02
we're all kind of getting used to this, but it's happening again as you go to, academics start
51:06
talking to industry people, as you get the education people talking to the web designer
51:12
people, there's, each one of these situations requires building a new language to talk between
51:20
these different cultural groups, if you like. And this is something that I think we need to do
51:26
and it's something that in Sydney I think we're really well placed to make a really great stab at.
51:34
Yeah it's really about... it's really about the people and the talent that you have.
51:37
And so I guess this brings us to, we're almost at the end of the official questions and then
51:41
there'll be a second section where everyone in the audience has a chance to ask some questions.
51:46
But there has also been a really big challenge in the quantum industry and that's diversity.
51:50
Diversity it has many benefits as we all know, in terms of improving the creativity
51:54
and productivity in a company, but it's becoming a real challenge for the industry as a whole. So one
52:00
last question for the panel is how can we improve diversity in the quantum technology industry?
52:06
Perhaps Biliana would you like to start? Oh look I think there's no doubt about that we need to
52:15
really increase the number of women in STEM and quantum, I think everybody agrees on that.
52:21
But I think it's also important to understand that there are currently
52:25
women in the field who have already self-selected and we need to make sure that they stay there,
52:33
develop mechanisms to ensure that they don't, you know that they don't leave.
52:41
And find ways as a company, I guess you have to take a stand and decide what do you stand
52:46
for? Stay true to your ethos, and develop ways to measure your progress and have the
52:52
periodical sanity checks. But what I do also want to mention is that, like Jack Nicholson
52:59
said in The Departed "nobody gives it to you, you have to take it". And so you, we, you as women,
53:07
we have to seek out these situations, seek out opportunities where we can have an opportunity to
53:14
show our skill set, raise our profile. Sometimes we have to go outside of our comfort zone. Hello,
53:24
you know? But it's really really important that we take that initiative. And another thing that women
53:32
should be thinking about is if you're already in the quantum field, if you're already out there in
53:39
the workforce you have actually earned a seat at the table. And so you have to show up to work with
53:45
that mindset, you have to show up to that meeting with that mindset, you have to write that email
53:51
with that mindset. Does anyone want to offer a perspective from academia as well?
53:56
Yeah I guess, so I mean we actually you know seriously discussed whether we should even,
54:03
you know ask this question in this panel, I mean obviously here we have
54:08
from the academic side, four middle-aged white men [Chris: speak for yourself, middle-aged, come on!]
54:15
Sorry, sorry you're already there Chris. But like, but I think it's really important that we ask,
54:23
it's a hard question, there's not an easy answer, but it's important that we ask this question and
54:29
from from the university academic side, like to think what can we do and what are we doing?
54:36
And I think like if I start from the kind of local area, most local past, where
54:42
the sorts of things that I'd like to try and do or we would like to do and see whether we're- and
54:47
a really important thing is we have to listen we have to keep listening as we do all of this stuff,
54:51
there's no point in just going oh we think this is how to solve it and just do that. We have to keep
54:55
listening because we're not the people who are, like we need to make sure that this is actually
55:00
working for the people it's supposed to work for. And diversity in gender is a massive problem in
55:05
quantum but there are lots of other diversity issues that we're getting, indigenous people,
55:11
the general cultural diversity. So starting at the top we've got, like at universities there's
55:16
kind of a, we have to think about what culture we want to create, and you know, we know that
55:24
funding is in a really constrained environment at the moment and if you want to try to adjust the
55:29
balance of for example gender, one you know, you'd like to be able to hire more women but you know if
55:36
you replace people who were there then this is a slow process that takes many many years while you
55:43
wait for people to leave, and if you want to try and just add more women then it requires
55:48
significant expansion and COVID and blah blah blah, this makes that all really difficult.
55:55
But what we do need to do I think, is think about when we are making those decisions, that is a
56:01
time when we can influence this. And we have to think about what tools are we using to make those
56:08
decisions, and really like how do we measure people's success? What do we mean by success?
56:14
How do we judge other people's success? And we have to think carefully about what metrics we use.
56:20
Universities love metrics, scientists love having,
56:23
putting numbers on things. But just because you can put a number on it doesn't necessarily mean
56:28
that that number is fundamentally useful. So for example judging how many people,
56:34
how many papers people have published, when we're judging candidates in the room we have to remember
56:39
that the metrics that we are using are estimating, are not just a product of someone's talent
56:46
but also a product of luck, huge role that luck plays in your career, and opportunity.
56:53
And we're really, when you're appointing someone you're trying to judge future success,
56:58
you're not trying to judge how good their opportunities have been, you want to know if I
57:02
give them this opportunity who is going to create the best outcome. So this is something that we can
57:08
do, I mean this is, we have to make, we have to try to drive this cultural change at universities.
57:14
But in the shorter term I think nobody's, you know we have a, we have an issue with gender diversity.
57:22
You can't just put advertisements out there and hope that people are going to come.
57:26
I think you really need to go out and get people, you need to go out and find people
57:31
that you want and really try to nurture them and bring them in. And there's lots of ways of doing
57:37
that but the undergraduate path that Chris was talking about is a really important one,
57:41
the last few years the Sydney Quantum Academy, also some of these centres,
57:45
the Centre for Engineered Quantum Systems have been running summer projects and
57:52
I've been, I've had three or four female students coming do summer projects in my group in the last
57:59
couple of years, and this has been fantastic, and these these students have been fantastic.
58:04
And I really hope, this is a longer term approach it doesn't solve my problem now right today,
58:09
but I hope that over the next couple of years these people are going to turn into PhD students
58:15
in my group or someone in industry or whatever. And the last thing is that we can't solve this
58:21
problem completely until we also go out and really change the cultural mindset that STEM
58:29
is or is not a place for women, or is or is not a place for indigenous people. And we need to,
58:37
and that's where we need to get out with the science outreach at every opportunity
58:40
and talk to primary school students, talk to high school students, talk to their parents
58:45
talk, to the school administrators who are advising people on career outcomes,
58:49
and say anybody can do this, and not only can anybody do this we actually really desperately
58:55
need and want people to come in with different perspectives. Biliana talked about the women
59:01
being here who have already self-selected, but in some sense to get through in the current system
59:09
that is a selection process of a certain type, we miss out on so much talent that comes with
59:16
really different perspectives and that's what we really want to be trying to capture I think.
59:22
Unfortunately I don't have much more time for that really important question but I think you really
59:25
spoke quite eloquently and I think everyone here on the panel agrees it's like a real challenge
59:28
that we're working on, but it's great to hear there is a lot being executed right now to try
59:32
and change it, and I'm sure we'll continue to try and come up with new ideas to solve it. If we can
59:37
try and get a quantum computer to work I'm sure we can tackle this problem. So now we'll move on to
59:42
the final section. So I've put up a QR code, it's also available on zoom for those who are following
59:48
online. Just get out your cameras and look at that link, it'll give you the ability to submit
59:54
questions to the panel. We'll use the last 10 minutes we have here today to address any of your
59:58
questions. I think I'll start the first one, so I had some, I've got some pre-compiled from before
60:04
the invite. This is probably for Simon because I think I might know what the answer is. What's
60:09
the most important thing in quantum tech that's not being talked about as much as it needs to be?
60:17
Geez, what's the most important?
60:22
I don't really, that's a good one I really don't know. There's a whole bunch in quantum tech
60:28
that should be talked about but isn't, I'm not sure which one's the most important. [Michael:
60:31
what's one example then?] Well we still have a problem with managing expectations.
60:36
We've been talking about it for 10 plus years. Manage expectations, manage expectations or we're
60:43
all going to get into trouble and in some respect I think it's getting worse.
60:48
Whether this is a function of the massive increase in corporate involvement, or whether it's
60:54
the startup community and the investment community getting in, I really think we've gone a little bit
60:59
downhill. And you know, some players are worse than others, I won't name any names
61:06
[coughs: IBM] but we we really have a hard time when it comes to, and I suppose I just
61:13
did what I'm gonna criticise by having a go at somebody, which I probably shouldn't have done.
61:20
So yeah, managing expectations are still a real issue. Now we have been seeing a subtle
61:24
change in language coming from, most notably Google but Site Quantum's done the same,
61:30
and we're starting to see a shift. So we've been dealing with quantum computing especially, sort of
61:35
this nisq nisq nisq nisq nisq, this sort of near-term, small-scale chipset stuff,
61:39
which was always a bit tenuous from a from a scientific perspective, basically
61:43
you have to get quantum computers to a certain size and to get quantum computers to that size
61:48
you need error correction which means you need a lot of qubits to do interesting algorithms. And
61:52
there was this push early on of what could we find that was like a killer app, using
61:57
you know 50, 100, 150 qubits in any given system. But that question was floating around in 2003,
62:05
2004 when I started my graduate degree and we never found an appropriate answer for it.
62:10
Luckily we have been starting to see some language changes that are sort of pushed by the corporates
62:15
a little bit more, to say no look we really are dealing with large-scale machines for these things
62:20
to actually become useful, and maybe that will help change the zeitgeist a little bit and sort,
62:24
of again put people into a more realistic framework of what's going on quantum.
62:31
Certainly my interaction with the VC community has been quite interesting, when they sort of
62:35
started getting into this in about 2015-ish, 2014, 2015 when you started to see more VC
62:43
firms getting interested in quantum technology, and it's a consequence of how the valley works,
62:48
I mean they really did look at it as just another app, rather than it's the app and it's the phone
62:54
and it's the telecommunications grid and it's every chipset that you put into the phone,
62:59
kind of technology, but that's slowly coming around. The more reputable quantum startups
63:05
out there, they've done a much better job at managing expectations but you know the
63:10
snake oil salesman you've always got to watch out for. And because the industry is not very big,
63:15
I mean for example those of us, me and my partner at H-bar we can pretty much manage the entire
63:23
ecosystem at the moment, it's not large enough that it's just things that we can't keep track of,
63:28
we know most of the companies even the new ones that come along, it's still very very small.
63:33
But the problem with that is that the snake oil salesman can have a very large impact that needs
63:39
to be pushed up against and needs to be managed by the reputable startups and the reputable
63:44
corporates. So I wish that would accelerate more, in some sense it's getting better but I'm also
63:51
worried that it is in fact getting worse. Maybe I'll add, I'm not too concerned about about the
63:58
impact on investors. I'm not too concerned about a little bit of this inside baseball,
64:04
"what's going on in our community". I am concerned about geopolitics. And quantum technology comes up
64:10
a lot in geopolitics and the reason for that is that the upside potential is enormous,
64:15
both in technological capability and potential financial gain, it is extremely difficult to
64:21
understand for almost everybody, right, especially a lay audience, and certain nation states have
64:28
made this a public priority. Now when you combine those things with what Simon was just referring to
64:33
which is the fact that it's easy to craft false narratives or narratives that are misunderstood,
64:39
we see that people who you know manage fighter jets and decide where
64:46
army battalions are going to go, they get misinformed by some of these geopolitical
64:52
considerations, and that really terrifies me. I had a General not long ago explained to me, it's a
65:00
retired Australian General, explained to me, like wax poetic about how China has this unbelievable
65:06
stealth defeating quantum radar and what it really is is China made a national priority
65:11
out of investment in quantum technology, it is a real strategic research priority. They made some
65:20
questionable pronouncements in state media that were designed really to shake things up, and
65:27
the western media like ate it up, and it's just like fundamentally untrue, this technology doesn't
65:33
exist. And you know actually the same week that this General was waxing poetic to me about it,
65:38
the inventor of the concept, a guy at MIT named Jeff Shapiro wrote an article about how quantum
65:45
radar doesn't and can never work, right, I mean... But that concern has infected the people who send
65:54
men and women to war. That to me is actually quite terrifying, and it is an area where I think that
66:00
taking back the narrative and keeping it tied to reality is actually a responsibility for for all
66:05
of us. I'll just remind everyone you can actually upvote the things that you're most interested in
66:11
hearing about, so I also recommend that everyone jumps in and just has a look at what questions
66:15
are available. So this one I'll leave open, this is a big question, how will industry address
66:21
the potential nefarious applications of quantum computing computing? For every noble quest several
66:27
are determined to use these developments for not necessarily the best of mankind.
66:35
Anyone want to take that one? I mean I'll go ahead. Well I guess one thing that I would say
66:40
is that at the moment the whole industry academic space in quantum technologies
66:48
is in a bit of a kind of a luxury state, in the sense that industry is really desperate
66:56
for academic involvement and to be benefiting from academic results, and they're also really
67:06
keen to share what they're doing. So there is a lot of what's happening in quantum technologies
67:13
that is still really open research and public, and where companies like Google and IBM
67:22
are taking their systems and publishing papers to discuss how they're doing what they're doing,
67:29
what they're doing, what the outcomes are. So one of the things that you can do is just shine the
67:37
cold light of day on these things and make sure everything is out there in the public domain,
67:41
that helps. Now of course I don't know how much stuff is going on behind closed doors,
67:47
maybe we're just seeing the tip of the iceberg who knows, but I think that actually at the moment
67:54
the vast majority of what's happening in the quantum technology space is in the public domain,
67:59
and that I think really helps with that. I was gonna say one of the things that we've started to
68:04
really think about is responsible quantum and how can we actually get together now to sort of help,
68:11
I guess learn from what we've seen in AI, learn from what we've seen in BioTech and can we figure
68:16
out a way to position ourselves better? And we're taking initiatives to actually lead
68:21
that conversation later this year. But I think really thinking about identifying some of the
68:28
risks, understanding and prioritising those risks, and based on impact to society, impact
68:34
to you know, what have you not, because this is not a technology that's coming tomorrow, so we
68:40
do have some time to you know, still think about it and think through the implications, and I think
68:46
understanding which risks are emerging, which risks are just make believe right now,
68:53
and start addressing them through conversations, through responsible quantum regulation policies,
68:59
and what have you. I mean I'll say, I'll take a slightly different view. Anything worth doing
69:06
can be turned into a weapon, right? Anything useful can be turned into a weapon,
69:10
and I think it is valuable that people think about the counter proliferation questions,
69:14
how do we ensure that there's ethical development the technology? That we you know protect personal
69:20
data? I think it's useful that people think about that, I don't think it's useful that it becomes
69:24
like, everybody's responsibility is ethical development of quantum technology, like we don't
69:30
know what that looks like, it's also not an area of expertise. And I think you do see that,
69:35
there have been failures in say, conventional AI that was just brought up about algorithmic bias
69:40
and things, they were in part identified by parts of the community who are specialists in like,
69:46
"wielding technology for good", in air quotes. And I think that the lessons we've learned there,
69:52
that supporting people who want to pursue these questions and want to proactively come up with
69:57
solutions, that I think is a very good way of approaching it. As opposed to the the, you know
70:04
more simplified version which is everybody has a responsibility for building ethical frameworks. So
70:08
I don't know anything about ethical frameworks and technology but there are people who do,
70:13
and I would strongly encourage them to be supported to come up with potential solutions
70:17
that others can implement. Could I just add that I think one of the ways which we can combat this
70:25
is probably the same answer to how we combat it in conventional technology, that's education not just
70:31
of people in the field but of everyone, so that everyone understands what's at stake, otherwise
70:38
a government or a company can just craft their own narrative and tell the users of their product that
70:46
the government's wrong, or the government can say that someone else is wrong and if the population
70:51
has no clue one way or the other and they just trust what's coming through their feed,
70:56
then it doesn't matter what we do in a sense, in the field. So we need, everyone needs to sort of
71:04
understand what's at stake and I think you know, that is going to be a huge problem because not
71:11
everyone even understands what happens when they click accept when they turn on their phone for the
71:17
first time, and then when it comes to you know, giant important policy decisions people are lost
71:23
and they don't seem to actually care. So I think educating people on what this technology does,
71:32
what it's meant for and how it connects to you know, what's important to you, your values your
71:37
needs is going to be, I mean it's important now, we're not doing it now, but it will be important
71:43
for quantum technology as well. I think we've got time for one last question, there's been
71:47
quite a popularity around basically students asking questions about the quantum industry.
71:54
I've summarised them in sort of two ways, one is how are we going to convince students to join the
72:02
quantum industry considering it's so small, and that there's been statements about those students
72:06
then being poached? And then, if you are a quantum student what do you think they should be studying?
72:13
And then finally, if you're not necessarily a quantum student do you think is there a
72:16
position for people without quantum degrees in the industry as well? Well I mean students are already
72:24
very very enthusiastic about doing it. I mean we see it at UTS in the engineering and IT faculty,
72:29
we have internships going and we always get a huge response coming from students
72:35
who aren't trained in physics, aren't changing quantum, so there's always a place for them.
72:41
Certainly, and I'm sure Michael will say more about it, I mean what fraction of
72:46
the Q-CTRL team has a background in physics and quantum? I assume it's not the majority.
72:52
It is but... [laughter] But I think maybe... Sorry that was not fair of me. I think to your point,
72:59
it is important that Q-CTRL is approximately 50/50, people with quantum backgrounds,
73:05
we do operate the world's largest team of PhD level quantum control engineers, and people with
73:10
product background, people who have never ever worked in quantum before, they came to Q-CTRL,
73:15
people who are web designers and graphic designers and user interface designers and web developers,
73:21
all these things. So I think there are many many opportunities, and if you want to upskill then
73:25
I'll promote this thing that Chris and I, Chris and Q-CTRL are doing together, it's a product
73:30
called Black Opal, it'll be out soon, it's like Duolingo for quantum, you want to get up to speed
73:35
it's a great way to do it. But we also are very keen on just advertising that, man if you come
73:42
from a background that's peripheral and you want to work in this industry, the salaries
73:46
are outrageous, like the amount we pay people is ungodly, watching my budget like vanish every
73:52
month in the bank account, because it is in demand from us as employers. We want people to
73:59
come into this, and that's on the technical side and on the more product-y side. So it's a great
74:04
industry to get into. Yeah and the other thing is like, there is a massive demand for people
74:11
with quantum expertise worldwide at the moment, at universities but also in all of the industry
74:21
players that are involved, they are all looking for people and a lot of these people are going, we
74:26
need people with quantum training and it's really hard to find them. Microsoft in Sydney, I've heard
74:32
people from Microsoft in Sydney on many occasions go like, we want people with more training,
74:36
we will partner with organisations who can help us get people in who have more training. So if
74:45
you choose as a student to do a technical degree that has some quantum technology involvement
74:53
and some pathway into quantum, your technical skills at the moment will be very much in demand,
75:02
and that's just for the people who end up inside quantum. And as we said before
75:07
the sort of stuff that you learn, the sort of deep tech skills that you can learn on how to
75:15
merge leading science with complicated engineering and industry type development,
75:26
these skills are in demand everywhere. I mean, they always talk about how you know,
75:32
people with physics backgrounds end up getting employed by consultancy firms, it's not because
75:36
they know how to solve Maxwell's equations. And the same thing will be true here, like if you
75:42
get training in some sort of area of deep tech where you really, you've shown that you can master
75:48
some like deep science and at the same time the kind of engineering and industry type component,
75:57
I'm pretty sure that in many different areas where those things are important, they're just going to
76:02
want to lap those people up. I was going to say, for those who don't want necessarily to stay in
76:09
academia or who don't want to be a deep tech people, there will be opportunities for you as
76:14
quantum consultants, there will be as quantum product managers and product developers. I'd say
76:21
to the questions of what subjects or what to study, try to sprinkle some psychology and
76:27
communications into your highly technical degrees, do some public speaking or things like that,
76:33
so you can actually be the translator, be the go-between between the various sort of,
76:40
ends of the spectrum, because I think those people will be in high demand.
76:46
Can I, I'll just point out that if you come to UTS and you come to learn quantum at the
76:52
undergraduate level, you're not a "quantum person" that's pigeonholed in quantum technology, right?
76:58
You're an engineer, and on top of that you're a computer scientist,
77:05
and 10% of the courses you took were in quantum. This is what a specialisation is,
77:10
right? Those are all specialisations, whether you come and specialise in data analytics
77:15
or machine learning or you know, architectures, computer architectures, whatever the
77:21
specialisation is that's you know 10%, you're an engineer, right, but you have this specialisation.
77:28
And so you can come and you can study this exciting field that gives you lots of, a breadth
77:34
of skills that you won't be able to get anywhere else, that you can apply outside of quantum,
77:40
and it's exciting. And I would just say, like to which, what you should study as well as studying
77:49
all those, basically I think you should study the thing that you love the most, because it's,
77:58
like quantum is so interdisciplinary you kind of hoist anything into it.
78:03
If there's something that you really love and you really like the idea of quantum,
78:07
study the thing that you love and work out how to get that element of quantum in there whether it be
78:12
through engineering or through finance or through chemistry or whatever, because there is a pathway
78:20
there, we're trying to work on that in the Sydney Quantum Academy as well, but there is a pathway
78:24
there, do the thing that you want to see. We don't know, like we came the boring path into quantum,
78:32
we don't know what the interesting parts into quantum... [Michael: again speak for yourselves!]
78:36
But like, we want the new people to show us what are the interesting combinations they can put
78:46
together. They have, just really quickly, I just finished teaching last semester "introduction to
78:51
quantum computing" and the students, what they did to learn their first subject in quantum computing
78:57
was they built a quantum video game, and they taught me things about quantum computing that I
79:02
didn't know, I couldn't have thought of. It'll be showcased, I'll write a blog post about it,
79:08
but it'll be showcased later and you can see quantum tic-tac-toe and a quantum music box and
79:13
all sorts of interesting applications of quantum technology that I guarantee you Google and other
79:19
people just aren't thinking about. Yeah I think that's a really great positive way to finish,
79:24
a lot of opportunity and clearly a great space to be in so I highly recommend everyone listening to
79:28
get involved. So that finishes the main section, let's thank our esteemed panel. [Applause]
79:39
For those online you can log off and have a drink, and for those here we've got a bar open
79:43
if you want to jump on. Sarah do you want to say anything fun? No, great. So please stick around
79:48
and say hello to all of us, we'll be happy to have a chat. Thank you very much for coming.