123 points by srvmshr 1 day ago | 31 comments | View on ycombinator
matthewdgreen about 16 hours ago |
spot5010 about 19 hours ago |
I felt this was a much better layman explanation of what a quantum computer does than simply saying a quantum computer runs all possible paths in parallel.
srvmshr 1 day ago |
ACM has named Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard as the recipients of the 2025 ACM A.M. Turing Award for their essential role in establishing the foundations of quantum information science and transforming secure communication and computing.
* An accessible news excerpt via CNN science [1]
Years before emails, internet banking, cloud servers and cryptocurrency wallets, two scientists devised a way to keep secrets perfectly safe and indecipherable to eavesdropping outsiders.
Their 1984 work depended on the hidden, counterintuitive world of quantum physics, which governs the way the world works at the smallest, subatomic scale, rather than complex but theoretically breakable mathematical codes to secure data.
The insights of Charles Bennett, an American physicist who is a fellow at IBM Research, and Gilles Brassard, a Canadian computer scientist and professor at the University of Montreal, have since transformed cryptography and computing. The pair received the A.M. Turing Award on Wednesday for their groundbreaking work on quantum key cryptography.
[0] https://www.acm.org/media-center/2026/march/turing-award-202...
[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/18/science/quantum-key-crypt...
bawolff about 20 hours ago |
This is mentioned almost as a footnote, but to (layman) me seems much more important than QKD, especially from a comp sci perspective instead of a physics perspective.
DrNosferatu about 19 hours ago |
RRRA about 18 hours ago |
I did see Gilles' lunch talks though, it was really insightful!
undefined about 12 hours ago |
MeteorMarc about 20 hours ago |
kleiba about 18 hours ago |
rvz 1 day ago |
Congratulations to Charles Bennett and Gilles Brassard.
goatyishere25 about 13 hours ago |
314crypto58 about 17 hours ago |
While obviously this takes nothing away from BB's many later contributions (and they have extensively credited him), it's just a reminder of the randomness that goes with scientific credit. Since my PhD thesis was on OT, I like to remind people of Wiesner. He deserves a lot more credit than he gets!
* I suppose if you're a real theoretician, since OT implies MPC and MPC implies all cryptography, then perhaps Wiesner's OT implies everything that BB did subsequently. I'm not sure any of that is true (and I've since checked with an LLM and there are some no-go theorems from the 1990s that block it, so that's super interesting.)
[1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1008908.1008920