저자: ChamathPalihapitiya · 외국인
요약 보기
구글 양자칩 Willow 발표로 양자컴퓨팅의 암호해독 위협이 가까워졌다는 All In 출연진 발언을 소개. 2~5년 내 비트코인 암호 붕괴 가능성을 강조하며 Chamath가 과거 비트코인 매도를 후회한다는 맥락 제시. 영상은 출연자들이 비트코인 가격 폭락을 원하는 것처럼 암시하며 음모론적 해석을 제기. 다만 후반부 게스트는 실용화까지 10년 이상 걸리며 검증 가능성도 불확실하다고 반박. 채널은 자사 영상 시청·공유를 유도.
다듬은 글
Google's new quantum chip is super impressive. On Monday, Google announced its latest quantum chip, it's called Willow. Here's the chip if you haven't seen it. And now we're a couple of years away from having computers that could theoretically break all decryption standards. I saw Sundar's post pop up in my feed.
I ended up missing my next meeting because I had to figure out how long it would take us to break the decryption standards we use for Bitcoin. Here's the answer. Warning to all crypto investors: share this video with everyone you know. Bitcoin is 2 to 5 years away from being cracked and taken over by quantum computing, at least according to the billionaire tech investors who co-host the All In podcast, Pia Patilla, David Freiger, and Jason Cacas.
For context, you need to know what just happened. Google just dropped the news of its new quantum computing chip called Willow. Alphabet's stock rose after announcing a breakthrough in quantum computing: its new chip, Willow, which can perform a revolutionary calculation in 5 minutes—something that would take a Normal supercomputer longer than the history of the universe.
How do they know if it's longer than the history of the universe? David Re Bosa has the full story on Tech Check today. To sum it up, Google solved a key challenge that the field has been chasing for almost 30 years, raising the possibility that quantum computing could one day be as transformational as artificial intelligence.
This morning I spoke with Google's VP of Engineering, Hartmut N, who told me that this breakthrough is essentially an entry ticket. If you can win at abstract problems, you're on the path to winning at useful problems. He suggested that some of those practical applications could be in the near future and not in 10 years or more as previously thought.
So this is a huge breakthrough. This is a technological innovation light-years away. Many didn't think this would happen so soon. If you have Bitcoin, you need to understand this. Google's Willow is a new quantum computing chip that represents a significant advance in the field of quantum computing.
There are two major technological breakthroughs that this chip makes, especially its performance. Willow claims to perform a calculation in less than 5 minutes. It would take one of today's fastest supercomputers entire lifetimes to complete 10 quintillion, meaning 10 to 25 years. And number two, error correction.
This is another major breakthrough. One of Willow's most important innovations is its ability to exponentially reduce errors as more qubits are added to the system. This is a groundbreaking achievement because traditionally, adding more qubits increases errors in quantum computing. Willow has demonstrated that it can scale the number of qubits while simultaneously reducing the error rate, making it a milestone in quantum error correction, which has been pursued for almost 30 years.
This has always been a concern for Bitcoin holders. They have always said that once quantum computing advances far enough, the Bitcoin algorithm will be cracked, rendering all our tokens worthless. Some say it's just a boogeyman, that quantum computing isn't really, or shouldn't be, a concern for Bitcoin holders.
The hosts of the All In podcast seem to disagree, now that Google has just launched Willow. According to them, Decrypting Bitcoin with quantum computing is closer than ever, especially Chamac P Patilla. I'll tell you why in a second, but listen, Google's new quantum chip is super impressive. On Monday, Google announced its latest quantum chip, it's called Willow.
Here's the chip if you haven't seen it. It's beautiful. The headline basically says that Willow performed a benchmark standard calculation in less than 5 minutes that would have taken today's supercomputers 10 illion years, or 10 to the 25th power, which is trillions of times the age of the universe.
Very important in the evolution of quantum computing, one of the most interesting areas that's being talked about a lot is cryptography. There's an algorithm created by a professor who was at MIT for years called the George algorithm, between 1994 and 1995. He basically came up with this idea that you could use a quantum computer to factor numbers almost instantly.
Today's decryption standards, all the RCA standards, everything the Bitcoin blockchain is based on, all our browsers, all server technology, and all cybersecurity technology are based on algorithms. that depend on number factorization. If you can factor a very large number, a 256-digit number, theoretically you could break a code.
It's almost impossible to do that with traditional computers at the scale at which we operate our decryption standards today, but a quantum computer can do it in seconds or minutes. And now we're a couple of years away—it's not really clear if it will be 3 years, 5 years, or 7 years—but we're a couple of years away from having computers that could break all the decryption standards.
I saw Sundar's post pop up in my feed. I ended up missing my next meeting because I had to figure out how long it would take us to break the decryption standards we use for Bitcoin. Here's the answer, because this idea frustrated me a lot. If you think of Willow as essentially a stable logic qubit equivalent on a chip, we need 4000 qubits to break RS to 2048, and we need 8000 qubits to break sh to 256, which is the underlying decryption framework of Bitcoin.
So I think you're right. I think we're in the endgame. 2s to 5 years, what I think will have to happen is that some of these chains will need a fundamental reimplantation. The weird thing about all this is that the error correction of the Willow chips improves the more of these units you use together.
Now, there are some really big problems within these chips, like the logical interconnections, which are very complicated. If you put two chips on a board, C2E communication is complicated. All this kind of stuff that we haven't solved yet. But this is an important step forward. What's really interesting in this episode is that the fourth co-host, David Sax, was replaced.
He 's not present. David Sax was appointed as the US cryptocurrency SAR by Donald Trump. He will work with the White House to promote crypto in the US. He has always been one of the biggest crypto fans on the All In podcast panel, and conveniently, they made this episode talking about how Bitcoin is going to collapse without him, which is even more convenient.
And Alcon Daily is the only one talking about this. Like the video and send it to your friends because they need to see this. In my opinion, it's not being Genuine, you'll see, Chamac has major regrets about missing out on Bitcoin in such a significant way 10 years ago. He was a big believer in Bitcoin, yes, he made some money, but he sold too soon.
Remember when Chamac said this on an episode of All In not too long ago for you? You know, honestly, what I think about is all the Bitcoin I sold. Ugh. You know, I had Bitcoin, I had a lot of Bitcoin in my funds when I was managing external capital. Bitcoin and things like this are the equivalent of the red pill, okay?
We're entering uncharted waters. Have you made investments in Bitcoin? Yes, personally, I have Bitcoin in my hedge fund. I have Bitcoin in my private account. Ah, it's a big development. It's a very, very, very huge thing. You know, it was a TR or $4 billion mistake, and it keeps growing because my partners at the time realized...
I wanted to be a good teammate and distribute the funds. It was profitable, but obviously I shouldn't have sold it. It would have made them a lot more money. Wow, it seems, then, that Chamac is applying a Wall Street billionaire trick as old as time. If you're bullish... Regarding Bitcoin, if you want to accumulate more Bitcoin, you don't go around talking about how great Bitcoin is; you go around talking about how uncertain its future is.
This is exactly what the infamous George Soros did with copper—the oldest trick in the book. If you want to buy a lot of something, what do you do? You screw up. When George Soros wanted to dominate the copper market, what did he do? He didn't go out and buy a lot of copper; he went out and sold a lot of copper and told people that copper was going to zero.
And that's when you jump in and buy a lot after the price collapses. That's what I think happened last year, and this is the clip that's circulating. But if you actually watch the full episode later on the All In podcast, the guest actually corrects the panel, saying, "Hey, you guys are really exaggerating this.
In several aspects, the story of this chip itself, the way Google is telling it, and the way you guys are repeating it, isn't really what it seems." Kid, what do you think about that? Yeah, first of all, I think it's missing It's a long time before this becomes a commercial product or any kind of application.
It's great that they're investing money, but think of it like Stanford receiving funding or the government funding basic research in some way. This is still a decade away. This is a topic that goes beyond my expertise, but I've been talking to smart people because I work in financial services innovations, and obviously encryption is fundamental, whether it's Bitcoin or another area.
And there are a couple of concerns, some of which are that it's not even clear if you can verify that this is true. By the way, to give an idea of the magnitude of the difference, a traditional computer would take 10 to the power of 25 years to verify that Google's analysis is correct, and it may not even be true.
But for the sampling test they did, that's the point. If we put it into a number in years, it will be... that's the big problem, I think. With the whole RSA reference standard they used, it's a framework that only a quantum computer could theoretically validate. How do you know the answer is correct?
I guess that's the question that takes so long to answer, and to be practical, assuming they solve all this in one... Saturated bubble. And if they manage to do it faster, then there's another problem: post-quantum decryption, which many important people and systems have already begun to adopt. And you have historical communications that were encrypted under an old paradigm that would be vulnerable.
And you know, with each passing year, the level of embarrassment or threat of those historical communications will probably have some kind of decay function or half-life. So if it takes another 10 years, the communications that were written 20 years ago will have embarrassing things and blah blah blah.
But the longer it takes, the more secure the communications and private exchanges will be. That seems positive to me. And thirdly, there's a question of order of magnitude here. You say you need three orders of magnitude of improvement. Is each incremental step easier and faster, or does each step represent 10 years?
And I don't think anyone knows the answer to that, right? Yes, there's a lot more work to be done. Kate, you haven't bought any quantum computing stock, no, not yet. Again, I think Chamac P and Zapatilla. And probably many people she works with behind the scenes want to buy Bitcoin at the lowest possible price.
We know that BlackRock is trying to suppress The price below has a link to this video; you should watch it. But beyond that, let's really talk about quantum computing itself. This is a real technology. Eventually, we'll see huge advances in quantum computing; I firmly believe that. So, what will happen in 10 years?
What will happen in 20? Could we lose our money? Well, we actually made a detailed video about this a couple of months ago. If you want the real answers, you need to watch another video. I'm going to leave this video linked in the comments. Do yourselves a favor and watch it again. I'll leave it in the comments.
Share this with everyone you know. My name is Aaron from Alcon Daily. See you tomorrow, friends.
Comments 0