Christopher Monroe, who co-founded quantum computer company IonQ, says people in the industry have noticed the identical bans and have been discussing their criteria, but he has no information on where they have come from.

“I have no idea who determined the logic behind these numbers,” he says, but it may have something to do with the threshold for simulating a quantum computer on an ordinary computer. This becomes exponentially harder as the number of qubits rises, so Monroe believes that the rationale behind the ban could be to restrict quantum computers that are now too advanced to be simulated, even though such devices have no practical applications.

“The fallacy there is that just because you cannot simulate what the quantum computer is doing doesn’t make it useful. And by severely limiting research to progress in this grey area, it will surely stifle innovation,” he says.

-- From https://www.newscientist.com/article/2436023-multiple-nation...

Everything a QC can do, a CC can do in greater time. QC is vaguely like a GPU or NPU in that they're niche accelerators for certain algorithmic constructions. Megacorps love them as curios.

there seems to be a there, there.

So if quantum computing is expected to be that powerful, what will happen to the trillions pouring into old-tech data centers?

Anyone else get the feeling that something doesn't add up here? Just what nonpublic evidence is behind these decisions to ban the new tech?