Big Tech Announcements: Big Talk or Real Walk?

Subscribe to Quantum Momentum Newsletter: 🔗 subscription link

Any progress in quantum computing is inherently valuable. Exploring new avenues to accelerate the arrival of "useful" quantum computers is crucial. However, we must remain cautious about hype and assess every "revolutionary" claim in the light of facts.

Recently, several Big Tech companies—including Google, Amazon and Microsoft—made high-profile announcements. Some of these stirred controversy, such as Microsoft's latest claims regarding topological qubits.

Here are some key elements to consider when analyzing such statements to avoid being misled by overhyped claims.

Timing Matters

Microsoft published their hype article in December 2024. However, they had already published research on topological qubits back in 2017, which puts the "extraordinary" and sudden nature of its recent announcement into perspective. 🔗 Microsoft's 2017 article

That being said, companies often have strategic reasons for making bold claims. They may need to reassure investors, maintain a leadership position in the quantum field, or enhance their brand credibility with potential customers. In a highly competitive landscape, staying in the spotlight is a necessity—even if it means embellishing the message.

Moreover, such announcements can create a self-fulfilling prophecy: they attract funding, talent, and public interest, which in turn can accelerate actual progress. This is the fine line between marketing and genuine scientific breakthroughs.

Logical Fallacies and Misleading Comparisons

The media often highlight that a given system is "designed" to support a million qubits. However, extrapolating a system's total capability based solely on physical space or theoretical capacity is misleading. Scaling quantum systems remains the industry's greatest challenge.

Here are some technical details worth examining: 🔗 arXiv publication, and 🔗 post by Ramon Aguado

When evaluating such announcements, key technical parameters must be considered:

• Number of qubits – Are they physical or logical? Expected or truly operational?

• Fidelity of qubits – How reliable are quantum operations?

• Coherence time – How long do the qubits maintain their quantum state?

• Scalability – Can the system scale efficiently without exponential overhead?

• Computational compatibility – Can the system integrate with other available quantum or classical devices?

• Actual problem-solving capability – What real-world problems can the current system tackle that classical computers cannot?

The Importance of Scientific Backing

A strong indicator of credibility is the presence of peer-reviewed research or preprints on platforms such as arXiv. However, the mere existence of a publication does not automatically validate the claims. A lack of technical data in an announcement, on the other hand, is a major red flag.

When assessing an innovation, here are some red flags to watch for:

• No peer-reviewed publications or arXiv preprints accompanying the announcement.

• Vague claims without numerical benchmarks.

• Exaggerated promises about commercial availability.

• Lack of independent verification from the scientific community.

Conclusion: Progress Wrapped in Marketing?

Despite the need for skepticism, these announcements still represent exciting progress. Even if some claims are exaggerated, they help drive the field forward by attracting attention, talent, and investment.

Sometimes, peeling off the corner of a sticker is the hardest part if you want to remove it. 😉

By keeping a critical eye on quantum computing claims, we can better discern genuine advancements from mere marketing hype.

Quantum Momentum explores how quantum science is moving from theory to real-world impact.
Each week, we bring you key breakthroughs, market trends, and practical applications.
Stay tuned, get involved, and be part of the quantum shift!

Subscribe to Quantum Momentum Newsletter: 🔗 subscription link