It's not in academia anymore, and I think that 2025 was the
inflection year. What?
Happened in 2025. The money flowing into Quantum
has grown 5 or 6 fold from about 2 billion to above 10 billion.
But it only takes one commercial case study, one with the whole
the whole sector moves. HSBC was September 2025 and they
reported something like 30 plus percent improvement.
And if you were their competitor, you'd have to follow
because you can't. Otherwise you will be left
behind. Bass line.
The bass line is designed to create an emotional response.
I've seen things you won't believe.
I'll start with an easy bit. Why the dedicated funds are
being set up is because of the flow of money, inflow of money
and particularly 2025 was a critical year for for quantum.
First it was 100th anniversary of quantum mechanics which was
then the year was called the year of Quantum.
But coincidentally the money flown into quantum has grown 5
or 6 fold from about 2 billion in 2024 to above 10 billion.
Hence, of course, the interest from investors who see that
there is money coming in and also there is industry
consolidation, some acquisitions, for example by
INQ. So that's easy.
Then in terms of why Quantum is exciting, again, you've
mentioned IBM and according to IBMCEO, he's saying that Quantum
is genuinely first innovation in computing since 1945, because
previously everything was based on bits.
And now the possibilities when you use smaller particles like
atoms or artificial atoms are exponentially, hence the name in
quantum exponential are exponentially larger because
that allows you some extraordinary new capabilities.
So it's not to say that so components of a quantum machine
is not any different to a component to your traditional,
traditional computer. So you still have opted
electronics, photonics, lasers, even, you know, cryostats,
everything that I have been using in my PhD 25 years ago in
laboratory is was there at the time.
But it's how you put those things together and how do you
create those complex algorithms which could attack previously
unsolvable problems. So that means, so there are two
types of problems that quantum is specifically good at and they
are the, you know, the high value, high value applications.
So the first one is optimization and optimization, of course, can
be optimization of anything. The classical problem is the
travelling salesman optimization.
So travel and salesman route find the best, perhaps not the
best, but fairly good optimal, several optimal routes to get
from A to B and it could be a physical or packets of data
etcetera. So you can optimise that.
But it found its way into finance where there are a big
revenue ready to be optimised such as you know bid offer
spreads in portfolios like HSBC has shown.
So optimization is an important, an important algorithm that
quantum could do potentially better than classical computer.
And 2nd is simulation, simulation of anything that is a
quantum body, which means anything to do with molecules or
atoms or electrons in it. So hence again, you could you
could use it in different industries, you could use it in
energy, you could use it in chemicals.
But so far, healthcare and the pharmaceuticals seem to be the
the applications which are being explored the most because that
is where the biggest R&D budget is available to be optimised.
And here you have potential utilisation revenue enhancement,
so to grow your revenue as well as to reduce costs.
So for example, if you use it for molecular optimization, it
can work in conjunction with an AI.
For example, you're trying to understand a protein or a gene
which is responsible for a particular disease.
And then the task which quantum computer can do very well is how
do you design A molecule which attacks that specific gene or
target have a spike in that particular place out of millions
and millions of different combinations.
And quantum computer being the quantum system itself can solve
this very efficiently. So again, components by itself
is not faster, but certain type of tasks it can do much faster.
And it's not to say that it's going to be everywhere.
It's not going to be probably in your mobile phone anytime soon.
Because probably, you know, you could do it much faster with,
with your normal Linux computer. And if you can do it with a
classical computer fast do it because you know, it's, it's
very sophisticated devices with, you know, billions of, of
computational units in each, in each CPU or GPU.
So you can do it with a classical, do it with classical,
but there are some big, big value tasks which are better
addressed in theory with classical.
That's where research is going to, and that's where you have
emerging new case studies. Where?
Where have we seen objective, unarguable success or movement
of the state-of-the-art? Yeah, based on quantum.
So you have something what people call quantum advantage
and that's when you are, you have a useful task which is
better, more cost efficient, more cost efficiently performed
on a quantum computer as opposed to a more sophisticated
classical computer. And again, talking about IBM who
arguably are the leaders in the space, 2026 is designated As for
them by them not designated, but they say quantum advantage is
2026. So again, I've mentioned that
there was a big flood of money into Quantum in 2025 and that's
because those commercial case studies have started to appear.
So HSBCI think that was September, September 2025 when
they've optimised the fixed income portfolio bit bit of a
spread and they reported something like 30 plus percent
improvement on that algorithm they used on IBM machine.
And then before that was modern, I think in July, which also, if
I'm correct, used IBM machine to say that they they were able to
use it for the, for the next Amarna vaccine.
And of course, I mean, it's, it's a big, big industry.
And that would be the perfect application where quantum
computer is suited for because it's exponentially improved the
capability of modelling those molecules.
Before that, again, I think AstraZeneca used Continuum
machine for, for similar application for, for designing
new molecules. And so that's the healthcare
applications. There were also some big cases
in finance or HSBC already mentioned that optimization
task. And of course, at the beginning
you mentioned that security or encryption is, is a potential
potential opportunity. And that probably is the most,
the highest profile use case for quantum computer where people
are saying that perhaps 25% of bitcoins are not safe.
And because you can, you can now target the public encryption,
public encryption key and perhaps the possibility of that
happening within next five years is maybe 30%.
And by the way, it's moving, it's increasing, increasing
specifically last month's Google announced that they need
significantly less number of logical qubits to crack that
encryption. And so you have on the one hand,
improvement on the software side where you need less and less
logical qubits to crack the security key.
On the other hand, you have improvement on hardware where
you have more and more of those logical qubits available.
And at some stage that will merge and that public encryption
key would be no longer safe. So hence you need to do
something today. And today you already have teams
at large financial institutions who do exactly that.
So trying to protect, protect their data for the day when it
happens or in fact design how to use quantum for other
applications. So for example, we have a lot of
cases of financial services using it for fraud detection.
So you had some, I don't want to name the clients, but it's the
some credit card companies using that, some big financial
institution using it for a loan for example optimization as I
said, HSBC public. So I can say that for the
portfolio optimization etcetera. When when you're looking at
start-ups, what, what are you using to determine whether
start-ups within the quantum field are have the potential to
grow? When when you talk, this feels
very much like a back to the IBM suite, traditional IBM suite
spot of highly centralised proprietary investments, which
are extremely expensive to buy and run to create competitive
advantage from now when I look at the, you know, growth of the
ecosystem around AI that is diametrically opposed to that
architecture, the AI companies, these small companies are very
low cost entry point, very low initial capital.
You know, anybody can kind of, you know, pull in the, you know,
cloud code, start building around a open LLM.
You know, AI start up thing can happen quickly and cheaply.
The quantum world feels like actually you're looking at 10s
of millions to enter that world. You know what what?
Where are the innovations happening in this area?
Yeah. So if you compare it to AI,
you'll probably have to rewind back about five years before the
charge of PT moment to compare where you are today with
quantum. So it is the situation where you
still have build up of hardware and the hardware battles going
on as it happened in hardware, in in computing before, in AI
before. And you have competing ways to
create a quantum computer because it's possible to make it
out of electrons, out of photons, out of trapped ions,
neutral atoms, artificial atoms, etcetera.
And nobody can tell you today exactly which will be the win in
modality. So there is a battle of those
different modalities. Is that a little bit like
looking for the NVIDIA of Quantum?
Exactly. It's like NVIDIA competing with
AMD at the same time as there is a build up capacity at, you
know, TSMC to satisfy that. And by the way, there is a lot
of fight going on in AI space. But at the same time, I think
the last figure I saw was seven and a half, $150 billion being
spent by the hyperscalers on the infrastructure.
So that is still going on as well because somehow you still
need to satisfy those, the demand for those, the physical
demands for to run those algorithms on something.
So today first of all, you have the battle in, in terms of
different hardware modalities and they all have pluses and
minuses. So some of them are faster.
So some of them are faster, some of them are more precise, some
of them travel better, travel better.
So that means that they would potentially used for potentially
could be used for different applications.
So some of them would be where you'd need speed against where
you probably value precision more.
So it it may actually not happen that it will be 1 winning
modality. It could be different winning
modalities, branching out and finding the end user.
What? What are the current industry
leading modalities that exist? So the current again, if you
look at the flow of money into into quantum hardware, the
biggest modality that has gotten most money, I think it dropped
irons. It's the one which is pioneer,
not Pioneer used by INQ and Continuum.
And incidentally, INQ is the largest publicly traded quantum
computing company today and Continuum which is part of
Honeywell, Honeywell has filed for an IPO.
So continue maybe come into the market later to the this year
again and it could be larger than IMQ again, same modality.
And if you look at the flow, flow of money into modalities, I
think last year Tropetans got something like 4 billion out of
10 plus. And then you get again the
figures I've just recently seen from McKinsey.
So I think Tropetans was 4 billion and then I think you had
two billion each from superconducting modality and
photonic modality. So I would say those 3 and in
terms of the public, as I said publicly listed companies as
trap times. So trap times are very good in
fidelity. So typically those companies
report industry leading fidelity numbers 3 nines or target 4
nines. And on the other hand, you have
very strong camp and of course old camp with IBM and Google who
are doing the superconducting modality and they are below.
So they're behind trap time in terms of fidelity, but they're
way ahead in terms of the speed. So for example, if it was a
computer, you'd be talking about megahertz speed on a
superconducting modality against kHz speed at the trap time
modality. So hence I'm saying if you need
speed, perhaps superconducting is is your way, but also the
other, the other one, the third one is as I say, which got also
more than 2 billion of inflows was the photonic modality.
Photonic is based on photons which are very well, very well
suited for fibre optic networks around the world.
So hence perhaps that's the way for the connectivity going
forward. But again, this is my personal
opinion and everybody has their own opinion.
But again, judging by pros and cons and the amount of money
those three are probably go in a little bit ahead of the others.
But there are others as well. I mean IB Ms. been on Quantum
for several decades. They have, you know.
I remember the Ginni Rometty days where it was blockchain
quantum, you know, AI with Watson.
I mean, what? Why?
I mean, IBM have a lot more than two to four billion to spend on
Quantum. Yeah.
So. So maybe the flow of money isn't
the ultimate determiner of modality success.
These these new models, are they emerging and overtaking existing
architectural ideas or like it? It feels as though there's no
clear understanding of the the structure which is going to
quote UN quote. Win.
Yeah. Well, I'm sure IBM and NVIDIA
and Google and pretty much every other larger large company which
is involved in AI or computing are looking at the development
and quantum. But there is no need to act yet
from their point of view. Because again, to put it in
perspective, NVIDIA, the market cap of NVIDIA is something like
3 or 400 times larger than that of the largest publicly traded
company, which is IMQ, which means with their with their
shares, they can buy a hundred of those companies.
So there is no need to do that yet.
Although, you know, we had quite significant appreciation and the
share prices of quantum computing companies, but they're
still tiny and there are many different modalities battling.
So in a way, you can wait a little and see which one is
emerging as the one which is perhaps the most promising and
then acquire. So what you have today is the
vertical acquisition by some place like for example, INQ,
which is publicly listed, as I say, largest publicly listed
quantum computing companies who could use their shares to
acquire pretty much anything. And I think they've made
something like 7 acquisitions. Importantly, they acquired
Oxford Ionics, which is the also trap time modality, which is
which is Auk company and that that has the technology which is
similar to what INQ had. But I guess acquisition points
that perhaps it was a valuable technology that they wanted to
have, but they also have an acquiring vertically like for
example the the the manufacturer so that.
Vertical integration is such a hot topic right now.
When you look at what I mean SpaceX XAI, you know what's
happening in terms of vertical integrated technology, like from
the coding itself all the way up to, you know, physical spaceship
infrastructure. That business model of hyper
consolidation and vertical integration seems to be like the
global trend for the late twenty 20s to own a tightly vertically
integrated stack from software development all the way through
to physical delivery. Quantum is maybe following that
playbook to try and create like exponential competitive
advantage by beyond all the monitor the supply chain all the
way through to the delivery of the, you know, computational
outcome of the system. Yeah, another, I guess, similar
development in the past could have been, you know, Apple
against Microsoft and Intel. So 1 is a little bit like a
closed wall garden. The other one is open
architecture. So like in quantum companies,
some of them are opening up, like IBM, for example.
They're very much looking to work with all the developers and
what they're interested in is building the applications
because without applications, those quantum computers are
just, you know, useless pieces of hardware.
So you need to build an application layer.
You don't have to acquire those. You can open up your systems for
access like IBM have done, and they're given, for example, free
credits for the developers. And then of course, they charge
also if it's getting to the to the point that it's becoming
heavy use. And in fact, they have generated
significant revenue from from that, from quantum.
So that's one way and you could build applications around your
hardware and hoping that there will be a killer app among them.
And if there is some adjusting technology in even in hardware,
you could always acquire it using your shares or you could
you could vertically integrate like some companies may prefer
to do. They don't open their their
systems to others. They just try to buy everything
around them and build, build a business like that.
So again, I don't know which one is the better way, but the both,
both are happening. It feels to me like both, both,
both are happening. And especially for those larger
quantum computing companies which believe that they are the
leaders in the particular modality.
I think then I'll get into the stage that they're building the
application layer and pretty much all of them are interested
in in applications perhaps more than hardware.
And of course they're watching the competitors when they're
coming up. And if there is something even
in different modality, we have a case one company at least
they're quite another modality and now do the dual track
development. So I mean, when it comes to your
investment thesis, are you getting in early and capturing
those acquisitions, but you know, to double your fund in
four years would suggest something a bit more
significant. Are you like where are you
focused specifically in terms of putting capital, deploying
capital? Yeah, we backed companies at
early stage and the the fund that has doubled in value is
typically seed or even pre seed investments and we've backed
those three different modalities.
So we have we have superconducting, we have
photonic and we have trap time. So we are not even making the
bet because I guess it's too risky at this stage.
And then we have also sensing and communications and
components like Quantico for example, is a most recent
acquisition as a component to de risk it further.
So because if you are investing in one modality, one company,
you're not sure that you're not sure about the timing of those
scalable deployment of quantum computers and you're not on top
of that you're not sure that that's going to be the winning
modality that's kind of double s your risk.
So it makes sense to do it as a portfolio.
And as a portfolio, as I say, we have three different modalities
which seem to be the ones which are attracted most capital at
least last year, but we invested in them before that.
We invested from 2022 to 2023 in those companies.
And then we also have as a diversifier, let's call it
sensing communications and components.
And it's not that a diversifier in in that sense.
I mean they are, but we invested in them because it's also an
interesting market. It may be smaller than quantum
computer and less prominent, but it's near a term revenue.
So as a near term, I mean one of our sensing companies already
have a device which which is ready to be trialled or it's a,
it's a medical device. So you have to you have to get
approval, but you can see the device.
When I, I did, I had a little look at your portfolio and I had
a look at the, this, the theme of where capital is being
deployed in quantum I. And, and when I've looked at the
way IT has become, you know, a geopolitical lever, certainly
over the last few years, AI, quantum, you know, these are
becoming utilities, you know, organizational and country level
utilities. And those utilities can be
applied across, you know, sovereign agriculture for the
development of fertilizers to create, you know, optimised food
production that can be used across, you know, industry,
defence, pharmaceuticals, healthcare, you know, is there
is there a is, is quantum entering an era where
computational capability is as close to countries and sovereign
as organisations? You know, I know I've seen the
UK government commit to a billion pounds of building
quantum infrastructure within the UKI feel as though AI
quantum, they're going to become pseudo components of
governmental control or organization of countries.
That's what we're looking at here, Kirill, I believe.
Well, there are some aspects of, of quantum computing in
particular and communications to a degree that is dual use, that
means defence and also the security component.
So that is how do you protect against the future hacking of
your data or even what's going on today, which is called
harvest now, decrypt later, which is happening.
So that's of course, if it is, it's critical because if you can
crack the security key, which is behind all your client data, all
your transactions, this is invaluable.
And it's invaluable on a state level.
Likewise, if you look at sensing, even for sensing there
is very important field called PNT position navigation and
timing. That's for example, how do you
find your geolocation in case of GPS denial, GPS signal denial,
of course, very important for for military.
So yes, it is it's important. I would say commercial
applications are bigger because those you know, if you just look
at again, McKinsey data, potential value at risk for just
finance and Healthcare is something like a trillion.
And that's more than, you know, more than for example, UKMOD
budget, which which you always have to fight for.
But defence has always been the earliest adopter of most
exciting technological innovations like mobile phones
or like Internet. So typically you would have
either defence grants or defence contract to develop the
technology and then it gets rolled out commercially.
So you're still at the stage where it's earlier.
So there are important, there's a big importance of the defence
and national national budgets. And by the way, that's why this
announcement from the UK is so important because UK have
announced 2 billion spent, including a billion for
procurement, including I think something 6 or 100 million
specifically for computing. They also have a bucket for
sensing and communications. And that's important because
that that means it's a government buying directly of
directly from those companies. And even if it doesn't give you
a useful tool at the end, it will create an ecosystem, it
will attract jobs, it will create the workforce.
Let's take Howell Quantum cluster, where we are partners.
When the government announced the launch of that cluster, the
science minister said that this is a major initiative planning
to attract a billion of investments, create thousand of
jobs just at Howell Quantum cluster.
So just one place in Oxfordshire so significant overall for the
UK. It's important a report from a
report from Oxford economics last year.
So 20 February 2025 put the figures something like 200
billion benefit to the UK or 7% of the GDP by I don't remember
year 2035 or 2040. And also importantly, William
Hague actually who, who forwarded this report, they said
that this is EU KS race to lose because now we may have lost the
AI race, but in in quantum, we are the place in Europe with the
most quantum startups and only a second to the US at the moment.
So UK is doing a lot. But likewise, if you look at the
UK and US, they each probably spent something like $6 billion
maybe. But China alone is 15 billion
and China has now put quantum as part of their new five year plan
and five year plan. That means it will be
implemented across all the industries strategically.
And then we'll go for large projects like national, you
know, satellite quantum networks, for example.
But as I say, UK is announcing a lot of a lot of investments and
it's it's been one of the early adopters, early promoters of
quantum with its national quantum strategy already 2014 a
billion dedicated which was very, very early.
But that's led to our place today that we are the leaders in
Europe in terms of number of quantum start-ups.
And as I say that procurement is very, very important and the UK
government is doing excellent job in my opinion.
What? Why is it often said that it's
too early for quantum? This this idea of harvest and
decrypt later. There's a sense that something
big is coming, but it's too early now.
So harvest data decrypted later from from a the reality of the
technology perspective, even on some of my earlier baselines
with some of the leaders at IBM, some of the comments on there
were quite dismissive of the maturity of the technology in
terms of its predictability and stability.
So, so one of the main issues that's been cited to me is that,
yes, we see these snapshots of amazing potential, but it's not
repeatable right now. Is it repeatable?
Are we moving to repeatability within quantum or is it still
slightly unpredictable? I think I've seen figure that
there are more than 300 commercial use cases and it's
not small companies. So as I said in healthcare it's
likes of AstraZeneca, Moderna. So and they are reporting real
useful commercial case studies. In fact, narrative has changed a
lot last year, as I said, last year was quite an important year
for for quantum, not just because it was the year of
quantum, but because of those commercial case studies from
large institutions that has come out.
And that was the reason why the funding has increased because as
you say, a very long time quantum was sometimes you know
three to five years ahead and suddenly they start started
popping in almost you know, quarter by quarter.
There is a big a big announcement and that means, you
know, if you have the probability of your encryption
key being broken within five years, if it's already 30%, you
actually have to do now up now. That's why those financial
institutions already have large teams working on those
encryptions. And if, for example, one of your
competitors in say vaccine business comes up with a new way
how they can come up with a molecule design cutting years of
the, you know, all the phase trials.
And if you are their competitor, you'd have to follow because you
can't otherwise you will be left behind.
And so it only takes one commercial case study when the
whole, the whole sector moves. So for example, Boeing is
working with IBM and announced and announced some results.
So of course, all their competitors like, you know,
Airbus, Lockheed Martin, they're looking at that.
And probably, you know, I don't know of course what's happening
everywhere, but you know, they, they also will be looking, will
be researching. And that's what brings money,
because that means R&D budget, it's mean people dedicated to
it. It's mean rather than the part
time, you know, one or two person teams, you'd have, you
know, 10/20/50 team dedicated to quantum working and it hands
purchasing, hands purchasing software, working on software,
purchasing the time on, on the quantum computers which are
available, etcetera. So I mean, that's, that's how it
happens. It's like, you know it, it's
probably going back to when we had those massive supercomputers
which would take the whole the whole room.
Yes, that is the situation today.
But wouldn't you want to invest back in those days in the 60s or
you know later, you know, 70s or 80s on those companies how much
money you would have made? So you are at the beginning at
the dawn of a very exciting developments and again bringing
back IBM from now on it's not a physical challenge, it's not
physics challenges, it's more engineering because the task
today, you know how to make it is just how do you shrink more
and more of those lasers and those those trapped ions on one
wafer. And as we know in in
semiconductors you have Moore's Law, which basically says that
every two years you basically double the amount of
transistors. Of course it doesn't happen
everywhere, but you have you have an engineering challenge to
do that. What we're essentially looking
at over the next five years is if there's a breakthrough moment
in either healthcare defence or communications slash encryption,
it's almost going to be a landslide into the industry
because to your point, you're going to move the
state-of-the-art so much farther forwards.
The, the, the competitive dynamics are going to be so
wide. I mean, it's, it's very
exciting, but it is a bit of a gamble.
It fails. Is it still in academia?
Yeah, well, that's that's the case not in academia anymore.
And I think that 2025 was the inflection year.
What? Happened in 2025 that made
quantum. Commercial use cases appeared as
I say commercial use cases on existing on existing machines
like IBM or Continuum machines by some large institutions which
which are researching or trialling some significant
revenue opportunity to either optimize or stimulate, simulate.
And you could look at you could you could see it's happening by
the flow of money into quantum because 2022-2023, 2024 it was
nothing. Well, 2024 was increased maybe
40% and then it's gotten 5 or 6 fold increase.
So it's like really you could see in flow of money that is
just as it's like a Jacob classic and that means as a
collective wisdom of investors decided that yes, it's time to
put the money in and it's not to say that the revenue all margins
are there because they won't come from.
Confidence Confidence and proof points are starting to occur.
Yeah, exactly. More and more people looking at
this flow of money feel confident that this is this is
actually significant. And it could come from
different, different angles. So for example, you could have
made this investment decision looking at the, you know,
reading some scientific papers where Google, for example, team
is saying that they now, you know, 1000 times less qubits to
do the, to decrypt the sophisticated encryption
algorithm. Or it could be coming from
commercial, pure commercial point of view saying that, OK,
you know, INQ is just paid 1 / a billion for oxide ionics.
I mean, that means it's, it's, it's happening.
There is a value on those businesses and you know, I
better participate in it. What happens when encryption
breaks? What happens when a bad actor
gets access to a technology that can break encryption?
Well, it's big. It's a big risk.
Some say if you attack, for example, Fed wire transactions
by one of the large financial, major financial institution in
the US, that's like a trillion a day.
Or bitcoins, as I say, 25% of bitcoins translates into
something like 5 or $600 billion.
And as I say, if you have client data like the transaction, like
how do you measure that even? Or how do you insure against
that? So I mean that that that's why
really you have to act now. And in fact, the government
started to legislate. So for example, quantum is part
of national security strategy in the US.
You Quantum Act will have some provisions for that, but
actually mandate and post quantum security.
So it's happening in the security agencies are the most,
most sensitive data that you have.
But in fact all data is at risk. So if you have, if you have not
time sensitive client data, you could do as I say, harvest now,
decrypt later if you are a bad actor.
As we go through 2026, what are you looking for as an investor?
What signs and signals do you look for in potential
investments to show that these companies or founders are indeed
building something that could be valuable?
Because you know what we discussed earlier about some of
these, you know, AI, space tech, quantum, you know, you go to the
events, you go to the investor events.
There's a lot of people talking about potential, but where do
you actually see the work getting done and what signals
start to appear to show progress is being made?
Well, first of all, when we speak to customers and when we
speak to our portfolio companies, we ask them to
emphasise who their clients are and what those clients are using
it for. So it's not anymore, you know
some technical benchmarks, how many logical qubits, what's your
gate speed? It's more questions about, OK,
who's using you or who we talking to you, who, who are
potential customers. So it's it's a commercial
opportunity. And what's also important is to
protect yourself against the hype because the hype is a
little bit appearing already like it happened before with AI,
like you add AI name after your company, certain evaluation goes
by a billion. So I fear that some of these
things may be happening in quantum a little bit now.
So it's important to actually understand whether it's first of
all genuine quantum technology or is it just, you know, another
semiconductor device. In in the early stages, I
remember people used to talk about number of billion of
parameters in the large language model.
No one talks about that anymore because the output of the large
language model is kind of felt and integrated into workflows in
People's Daily lives. They don't worry that I'm going
to use this language model because it's got 182 billion
parameters. Quantum maybe is still in the
we've got X billion parameters. Soon the value will be seen on
the outcomes of the technology, not the internal.
Mechanics, absolutely. And also from that point of
view, it won't really matter which modality you're going for
as long as you're producing results and you have commercial
use cases, commercial applications and customers who
are prepared to try this. So that's what's more important.
And if you look at the components as I say, and then
it's, is it genuine quantum or is it overhyped and also very
important, is it actually commercial already?
So is it you're trying just to, you know, find money for some
great research idea which nobody had tried in practice and you've
published a paper on it and so therefore you now want to start
a company or it isn't too early for that.
So perhaps there are several steps that you need to take
before before trying to to ask VC for investments.
What do you think the reality will be in five years?
Sorry, what do you think the reality will be in five years?
Because five years seems to happen very quickly these days.
Again, coming to IBM, because they seem to have the most clear
Rd. plan for quantum. They say 2026 is the year of
quantum advantage and 2029 is deployment of fault tolerant
computer at scale and they're working to it towards this goal.
As I say, it's according to CEO, it's the engineering, pure
engineering problem. So you can actually see it
happening by 2029. UK, when they announced their 2
billion funding, they said they want to be the first country in
the world to use quantum computing at scale by early
twenty 30s. So I guess we'll take that, that
by early twenty 30s we will have quantum computing used at scale
across applications where it's needed.
Primarily, in my opinion, it's going to be healthcare and
finance. You are when when we've talked
about Quantum, the potential upside is undeniable.
The idea of infinitely parallel scale computation done in a way
that accelerate traditional computing algorithmic progress
processes. But but, as with everything
phenomenally powerful or with huge potential, it can be used
for both good and bad. And, and, and you know,
conversations I have is about how regulation controls access
to these technologies, how regulation manages access and
the law policies, the use of them.
Carol, you're at the emerging edge of early stage precede
seed, you know, Series A investment within computational
world. You know, you have a a deep
history in physics and, and and you're speaking within these
ecosystem patterns all the time. Do you?
Are you confident that quantum will take humanity to a utopic
outcome? I, I would say this is a
significant revolutionary technology which has some large
applications. I wouldn't, I wouldn't go
further than that. I wouldn't say this is, you
know, leading you to some utopia and for the humanity, no, I just
think it's the next big technological step for the
humanity.