# If one had the funds, could one buy a prototype quantum computer and mine Bitcoin?



## Space Lynx (Dec 18, 2017)

assuming one had a couple million dollars in startup funds and the ability to get more investors, would it be possible to create a program designed to the use the latest quantum computers to mine bitcoin?


----------



## Papahyooie (Dec 18, 2017)

Considering even the best quantum computers are still little more than experimental, I would say the answer is "not yet."  Wouldn't be energy efficient enough at the moment anyway. They require constant cooling down to near absolute zero to operate. I'd imagine you'd spend more to operate it then you profit from bitcoin.


----------



## notb (Dec 18, 2017)

It's very unlikely that would be efficient or profitable today.
In the future, when we all have access to quantum computers... well... cryptography algos will have to become a lot more complex.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2017)

Any quantum computer app designers here? Anyone?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Dec 18, 2017)

Mining will be over before quantum computing is accessible.


----------



## notb (Dec 18, 2017)

erocker said:


> Any quantum computer app designers here? Anyone?


I wonder how many people on TPU actually have programming experience (at least in coding). Or a decent understanding how a processor works.

Thing is: years from now, when quantum computing becomes a standard in industry / science, it won't be very widespread - even among programmers.
I mean: to write efficient algorithms today (or low-level stuff: OSes, drivers and such), you need to know a few things about how a CPU and memory work. No way around it. But the basics are pretty easy.
To write efficient algorithms on quantum computers (more importantly: to understand what problems they're actually good at), you'll most likely need some understanding of quantum physics. So we're talking about a fairly small part of the population.


----------



## Frick (Dec 18, 2017)

notb said:


> Thing is: years from now, when quantum computing becomes a standard in industry / science, it won't be very widespread - even among programmers.
> I mean: to write efficient algorithms today (or low-level stuff: OSes, drivers and such), you need to know a few things about how a CPU and memory work. No way around it. But the basics are pretty easy.
> To write efficient algorithms on quantum computers (more importantly: to understand what problems they're actually good at), you'll most likely need some understanding of quantum physics. So we're talking about a fairly small part of the population.



Not to mention quantum computers will never replace them old general purpose bit-counters, so the market won't be that massive anyway. If you get properly good at quantum computers you can probably write your own pay check though.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2017)

notb said:


> I wonder how many people on TPU actually have programming experience (at least in coding). Or a decent understanding how a processor works.



For quantum computers? I'd bet none. Conventional stuff, quite a few.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 18, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Mining will be over before quantum computing is accessible.



No way in heck given the timeframe of quantum being near, and mining being impervious to death.


----------



## ne6togadno (Dec 18, 2017)

fyi


----------



## notb (Dec 18, 2017)

Frick said:


> Not to mention quantum computers will never replace them old general purpose bit-counters, so the market won't be that massive anyway. If you get properly good at quantum computers you can probably write your own pay check though.


Of course. What we use today is already a perfect machine for general calculation (simply because binary system is perfect). It could change it's physical form (as we move from silicon to GaN and then to organic stuff), but the idea of bits and some sort of transistors is here to stay.

Now, as quantum processors arrive in datacenters, it's likely that some libraries will make use of them. So you won't have to know what a quantum computer is (or even, that it's available). You'll just open R or Matlab, write some funcSolvePDE() and the interpreter will decide that this code is going to the quantum miracle. But that's not programming for quantum computers, obviously.

And as for a potential career path... Sure, if someone has a teenage child who's good at math and likes programming, and if he hopes that this child will buy him a car 20 years from now, why not encourage him to study computational physics instead of typical computer science? 
I mean: a BMW is nice, but a Bentley is nicer.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2017)

ne6togadno said:


> fyi


I can't be the only one who thought that would make a sweet belt buckle!?!


----------



## xkm1948 (Dec 18, 2017)

You have a quantum computer and you still wanna do peasant work??? Mining????

You could have hacked the shit of every single bank and be rich AF in no time.


----------



## Space Lynx (Dec 19, 2017)

I was only inquiring, lol cheers for the responses. I think Google is further ahead then it is letting on on quantum work-ability, but we will see in due time.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 19, 2017)

Cryptomining isn't a suitable workload for quantum computers.  Super computer clusters fully loaded with GPUs would be better.

Quantum processors are best at solving big data sets where there is a many-to-many relationship...culling possibilities quickly to find the best path between the two.  It's something POWER, x86, and GPUs suck at without eating gobs of memory.  It's an exponential relationship between qubits and conventional memory.  Don't quote me on this but I think to do what a 2000 qubit processor can, a conventional machine would require 1.1481306952742545242328332011777e+*602* bytes of memory (there's not even a unit to describe a number that large).  Or, like, more memory than exists on the entire planet since forever.

So...memory intensive programs are more likely to benefit from quantum computing than non-memory intensive.  Cryptocurrency mining is not memory intensive.



lynx29 said:


> I was only inquiring, lol cheers for the responses. I think Google is further ahead then it is letting on on quantum work-ability, but we will see in due time.


Pretty sure Alphabet (Google's parent) is one of the few D-Wave system owner/operators.  I think one of the US national laboratories owns one as well.

Intel I think is the only one other than D-Wave that has a functional commercial qubit processor but it's way behind D-Wave.


So... the cooling system on the D-Wave systems consumes approximate 25,000 watts which translates to 18,000 kwh/month.  My electricity here is 0.05211/kwh so just the electrical cost of it would be $937.98/month.  That doesn't count all the liquid nitrogen and H3/H4 which aren't cheap either.


----------



## trog100 (Dec 19, 2017)

AI will take over.. super computers will build better super computers and so on infinitum.. messy human beings will ether be kept as novelty  pets or eliminated altogether.. 

trog


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 19, 2017)

trog100 said:


> AI will take over.. super computers will build better super computers and so on infinitum.. messy human beings will ether be kept as novelty  pets or eliminated altogether..
> 
> trog



Meh, humanity is overrated anyway.


----------



## jaggerwild (Dec 19, 2017)

There is a company who will mine coins for you already, as with anything successful they thought of it. I wonder how you pay for it? by how much they earn for you?
https://www.bitcoin.com/


----------

