Life on Mars - A podcast from MarsBased
Life on Mars - A podcast from MarsBased
Quantum computing: The future is closer than you think - Corporate Innovation Summit
Quantum computing is no longer just a futuristic concept, it’s quickly becoming a practical reality. In this must-watch panel discussion, three quantum pioneers dive deep into the real progress being made and what’s coming in the next few years. From breakthroughs in drug discovery to tackling cybersecurity challenges, quantum's first impacts will be felt in unexpected ways. Get ready for an eye-opening conversation that cuts through the hype and gives you the insights you need to prepare for this technological revolution. Don't miss it!
🎬 You can watch the video of this episode on the Life on Mars podcast website: https://podcast.marsbased.com/
Hello everybody, I'm Alex, ceo and founder of Mars Days. Welcome to another episode of Life on Mars, and in this episode we bring you the second panel of the Corporate Innovation Summit, in continuation of the previous episode. In this case we discuss quantum computing, and this is something that I had to prepare a lot for, because I'm far from being an expert, but luckily we compensated with having three real experts on quantum computing on the panel. So, without further ado, let's jump right into this episode. Time to move to the next panel. As I mentioned, we are a little bit behind on time. I'd like to welcome the next set of speakers to the stage Sergio, dorit and Victor. Please come to the stage. Big applause for them. We got too many chairs, but we can sit more spaced. Let's leave distance between you. It should be distance or not, depends. You came last year. You decided to repeat this year. I'm not sure why. I'm not sure too.
Speaker 2:I'm still questioning, let's start One, two three.
Speaker 1:It works, thank you Well, thank you for being here, sergio. I wanted to start with you because I have the confidence, and actually you say in Spanish we say that confianza de Asco. So we've seen that quantum is something that people say every year. This is the year for quantum, right, obviously, 2025 is the year for quantum, unless it was 10 years ago. But we have seen this demo by Kusentroid. We're seeing other examples being shared at Mobile World Congress, and yet we don't have the hardware required to run the real problems. And we're sending stuff to quantum computers but they don't solve real problems or problems we could tackle with quantum computing. How far are we from that, especially taking into account the big news from last week? Is it on? No, this one, then you use this one.
Speaker 3:So this year.
Speaker 1:it is truly no, this one, Then you use this one.
Speaker 3:Oh yeah, so this year it is truly the year of quantum. The UN declared it last year.
Speaker 1:So it's the guy with the quantum newsletter, yeah.
Speaker 3:I do own a quantum newsletter. We call it the quantum pirates newsletter, if you're interested in that. I came to speak about my book, of course. So this is the year of quantum officially. The UN and several other organizations have declared that like that, and that's because the amount of development and milestones achieved in the last couple of years or so have been quintessential for what we are seeing today. The past five years or a decade have been already either solved or are in the way of being solved in terms of scalability of the devices or error correction of them, of the devices. Moreover, we have a lot of tools, a lot of research, a lot of government investment, and we'll talk about cyber security as well and the importance of, again, governments and companies to tackle the challenge of cybersecurity and the risk that quantum computers put to that.
Speaker 3:Now, the quantum computers that we have today we have them, they exist, and Carlos showed how you can send stuff to some of these quantum devices. They're still pretty small. So if you take a production workload with the sizes that it has, many of these devices will not be big enough or robust enough to run them. If you take a production workload with the sizes that it has. Many of these devices will not be big enough or robust enough to run them. But that doesn't mean that you don't have to start today, because finding the use cases and coding your data, finding how to use them and learning and upskilling your team is quite of a challenge. So, yes, this is the year of quantum, I would say.
Speaker 1:In fact, we could be nerding out about whether the changes from physical to logical qubits are going to affect the industry and whatnot. I don't think this is the right time, especially given that it's like beer o'clock, but I'd like to get your vision on why corporates have decided from going like super private and secretive about their strategy with new technologies because back in the day, you know, oh, we don't want to share, we don't want to share, we don't want to share. And I was like, yeah, here we have, we have got everything is open source right now. So why did that change? And uh, what? What are you doing in terms of quantum at modis and open source as well?
Speaker 3:let me put put it this way how many people do you guys think work in the private sector full-time in quantum computing? Would you say a number, three people, that's really. There are a hundred companies.
Speaker 1:You're part-time.
Speaker 2:I'm part-time, but there are a hundred companies, at least, that have quantum groups.
Speaker 3:So the best guess? Obviously this is a guess, but the survey that I've been making with a lot of people from different companies, big and small, is around 5,000 people, and there are a handful of companies with a few hundred people, such as you guys in Multiverse, IBM, AWS, Microsoft, have robust quantum teams on different research, but that's still around 5,000 people. Maybe I fall short. It's 6,000. Maybe 7,000.
Speaker 1:That's still peanuts, Unless you count quantum enthusiasts on LinkedIn, which is 5 million people.
Speaker 3:Well, yeah, yeah, it's almost as many as chat GPT experts. Exactly. So, with that amount of people and with something that is still getting into the maturation stage, sharing and building a community is fundamental. We all learn from each other, and it starts from academia, from research, goes into the implementations and something that Greg mentioned before on AI. That is absolutely true as well. For quantum. Fine, you have that. What are you going to use it for? What are the use cases and how these use cases actually touch on the quantum device? It's not just a high level textbook problem, but my data, my way of solving it and the specific use case that you're solving, especially in finance.
Speaker 1:Dorit, welcome for the second year of thank you I have before that.
Speaker 2:the first rule is to spell right the name. Qubit is Q-B-E-A-T, but I'm in a superposition between cyber checkpoint and qubit and quantum.
Speaker 1:My question is going to be so. There's one news from last year. Last year you were Only checkpoint, yeah, only checkpoint. I mean, besides all the other things you do, but no qubit ventures. So can you tell us about what is that? What is your investment thesis? Because it's very difficult sometimes to understand the investment thesis of VCs. But now, in quantum, how do you build the thesis around that?
Speaker 2:Excellent. So we start with the question how many years to an advantage? So whether every year is the quantum year is because you have to prep for it. But I believe advantage is two, three years from now. Two, three years is still good. Advantage means that you could not this year. You could still run it, but advantage mean real advantage to some application. Second part is that not one winner takes it all. If you want to invest in quantum, you have to have a portfolio. So we're going to have a portfolio of multiple elements of this to kind of facilitate the industry to happen. We also believe that it's still a phase where early stage solution has space to impact. So we are going to invest in early stage quantum focused only, and we think that quantum is going to change the world and that's exciting.
Speaker 1:How do you balance your investment thesis between universal versus specialized quantum computing?
Speaker 2:What do you mean in that sense?
Speaker 1:In the sense that you know one of the fields that we have seen in AI for instance is, at the very beginning, everything was generalist right, and so people were trying to tackle generic problems with generalist AI. Then down the road we saw or like the sector saw that specialized LAMP, specialized models, specialized tools were much more performant, less error prone, and all of that in an ever-changing landscape with quantum that's so unstable. And then all of the sudden, microsoft comes and shakes the entire industry. How do you balance your performance with that?
Speaker 2:I think that at early stage in quantum there would be very few generalists. There is no way to be generalist in quantum in early stage. It's going to be crazy. Even picking two of the 10 modalities is not something that multiple people will understand. So every early stage is going to focus on something, either on a qubit modality or on a component or on software. On aspects, very few would be attempting to be very generalist and that's going to be a mistake. Now the bigger guys may be trying to be generalist, but our thesis is that still there is room for early stage technologies to influence the space because it's very much evolving and you could see technologies that are new, that are jumping over previous generation of technologies.
Speaker 1:Still, In AI. Two and a half years ago more or less, we saw the breakthrough to the general audience with ChaiGPT. Chaigpt accelerated. Chai GPT kind of like accelerated things because it allowed the, it crossed the chasm in a manner of speaking right. How far are we from seeing something like this in quantum?
Speaker 2:So I think this is really the question of what the advantage comes to be. I said I think there would be an advantage in two, three years. It's not going to be the application that my mother will use or everybody in the street, but they may use it because their application will use it. So this would be kind of a back-end problem solving for some bigger problem. But maybe If it would be optimization of portfolio of investment, maybe everybody would use it if they are an investor. So you may be using it at the back of the scene more than AI, which is kind of front-facing you. You talk to it, it becomes very personal.
Speaker 2:In quantum the behavior would be different. And if the first thing would be to invent chemical material, I'm not sure how many people would be directly using it. If the first would be finding a drug, it's different things, but even then approving a drug will take a long time. So it really depends on what is the first advantage. That would start C-Solution. But what's true is that we all had technology, for I don't know if you saw the graph of ordering food from home in the US there was a lot of technology to do this, but only when COVID came. All of a sudden, everybody ordered food from home. So there are sometimes moments that are triggered not just by your technology readiness but by the combination of your technology readiness with something that is really looking for this technology to happen.
Speaker 1:In fact, one of the differences between AI and quantum is AI is kind of fancy in the sense that anybody can use it, and it's more B2C-oriented because, as you mentioned, anybody can use chat, gpt to generate bedtime stories for their children. But I don't think I'm going to create proteins using quantum on my phone in the next five years. I don't know.
Speaker 2:But maybe you'd use a drug that was invented this way.
Speaker 1:But then it depends if you'd feel that quantum solves your problem really or it's too far, like along the road, yeah, but it's kind of like we have to wait for a moment where an industry can invest something in a real use case, because quantum is very back-end more than front-end In this sense. Maybe we've done or I'm not in quantum field, but you are, you've done benefit from this hype that actually generates the flywheel of more users spending more money than more investment being made, more virality through marketing. There is more virality.
Speaker 2:but in business cases, If one financial company will start to use quantum to do some optimizations of their portfolio, you would see all the banks and all the financial companies using it. So it won't be the effect of viral in the consumer sense, but it could be as important effect of viral in the business sense. If you'd see somebody optimizing material with quantum, you'll see many, many companies that are optimizing material with quantum. It won't be my mother, but it will be many companies.
Speaker 1:It won't be me either, yet.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:Thank you for that, victor. Let's move over to you. You got some big news this morning that were announced Not you personally, but your company. So congratulations on getting a lot of taxpayer money. You're welcome. No, actually you got something like 65 million investment, 67. Okay, 67. Okay, 67. You can break down, if you can explain a little bit what the company does, because a lot of people from the audience might not be familiar with that? Obviously, they're familiar with what Dirk does because she's been here last year. She's explained. Sergio is already very frequently at Startup Prime. How about you?
Speaker 4:Okay, first of all, regarding this investment from the ministry you raised the point, it's part of our CDSB that we are raising 150 million closing this quarter, so this month, basically and it's part of the commitment from the government of Spain to deep technology companies like ours. So I think it's a support that it's welcome to the Stata world. In terms of materials computing, we are a software company. We develop software for quantum computers and also quantum-inspired computing. I think I mentioned a little bit what does it mean? We call them basically to set the stage. We call them quantum computers because calling them science experiments don't raise valuations, because really they are science experiments right now. They are super noisy, they have a lot of errors.
Speaker 4:Of course, there is a path to solve all those problems. It's an engineering problem. The mathematicals and the physics behind that are all solid, but still an engineering problem that we are not capable to solve. I don't know the time frame. I'm in sales and I want to do sales every three months. I don't want to wait six years and there is this clear path to developing a quantum computer. There are many alternatives and, as a company that does software for these quantum computers, it's clear that we cannot make a sustainable business only based on quantum computers. So we had this idea a few years back that we could use some algorithms that are inspired on how quantum mechanics work, but they run on classical CPUs and GPUs, fpgas and using those techniques for example, tensor networks or simulated annealing we could have this transition from the quantum world, from the real quantum world, from the real quantum computer, into a problem that we can solve today, into a problem that we can bring value to the customers today.
Speaker 2:I want to say something about value today. So this is our path Go ahead. Value today we met a few tens of companies that do things with quantum. One of them is a company in the US that is looking for small molecules for specific drugs and the founder said that they are using today annealers and they get to a result within three months that they would otherwise get to three years. So I think we should just put on the table that there are advantages. I don't hear it often. Most of the people that do use quantum today use it in order to experiment, prep and kind of set the stage for when the quantum computer would be bigger. But there are some advantages already today.
Speaker 1:It's just not yet the wow advantage that we want to see like exponential advantages no, but that's a good point, because usually one of some technologies have experienced a breakthrough moment when a certain industry that was not expected, like maybe medicine for, for instance, right. Or the case of cloud, so streaming, for instance, or online gaming they create a new use case and therefore more of this technology was consumed, therefore lowering the cost of it, creating the GIFs paradox and whatnot, right. So in the case of, I wanted to ask maybe that's a question for the three of you, I usually don't do these kind of generic questions but like which field do you think, what sector do you think is going to win the race of quantum, or which one is not, maybe not going to win, but is winning right now?
Speaker 4:I only know.
Speaker 2:I only know one company that actually trying to use it in a in an advantageous way. The others are an experimental way and in proof of concept. I think that the chase is between material, drugs, financials. There is a couple of different types of subjects. There are simulations and there are optimizations, mainly in terms of the algorithms being used.
Speaker 1:Sergio, obviously finance, right, obviously finance.
Speaker 3:Or the next thing you create. So I really believe that pharma is one of the key contendants, because quantum devices are extremely good at dealing with quantum data and molecules, drug design and all that is effectively quantum data. So anything that makes quantum information work better, whether it's simulating atoms, simulating particles and so on can be really good. However, obviously in finance there could be a lot of haptic. So if you there it was mentioned in portfolio optimization If I tell you I have a thing that can give you 1% more returns on your portfolio, how much would you pay for that 0.9% of your returns? And on top of that, the availability of those devices is actually limited, or the ability to connect your data and your systems to those devices is limited, or the ability to connect your data and your systems to those devices is limited, and there is a big competitive advantage for those companies that have started working on that already. Now the challenge is and I'll challenge you a little bit on the advantage thing advantage is completely dependent on the benchmark, and the benchmark comes not only with what can you do classically today, but also what your data is. So in finance, for example, we see many cases and many claims of there's quantum advantage on portfolio optimization, for example, but when it comes to using the real data that companies use in production today, everything falls through the cracks, at least now. Right, it's not about optimizing with 10 assets from the S&P 500 on equities. It's about how financial institutions actually do these kind of processes and very complex ways of encoding the data.
Speaker 3:I am very optimistic, obviously, and that's why we work on this. But maybe back a little bit to your point where we work on this. But maybe back a little bit to your point. Comparing quantum with the NAI is not the right comparison. Quantum devices are the equivalent to NVIDIA GPUs, if you will, and you can use those GPUs for playing video games, for mining Bitcoin or for simulating things and training LLMs, for mining Bitcoin or for simulating things and training LLMs. Likewise, if your company has a lot of data and knowledge on how to analyze risk of a given company defaulting, for example, and you run that classically and you can encode that information in a quantum device that happens to run faster in the same way that GPUs run faster than CPUs for certain types of problems then you get a competitive advantage. That's the whole flow.
Speaker 1:Victor, how about you? Because you're seeing many more use cases, perhaps across industries.
Speaker 4:I agree with material simulation. I really like this idea of being able to simulate properties of materials before even designing them. We have a specific case with the German Space Agency, where we partnered with this Delft company that are developing superconductor nanowire single photon detectors. They develop these sensors that are one million times thinner than a hair and they have this 99.5 detection rate so they can detect single photons. And it's amazing, there's an amazing sensor. You can detect single photons, um, by using these properties of this, of this type of materials, um, and now the bodies can we be the benchmark?
Speaker 4:So now we're trying it with them is can we develop an algorithm that can, before they build the product, the sensor? Can we predict the optical properties of this sensor before we build it? And the race, the benchmark is pretty high. It's 99.5 detection rate. Can we do something with a quantum computer in three years' time that can beat this benchmark? It's hard. So I mean, the problems that we have in front of us is not toy models, as Sergio explained, like optimizing 100 portfolio, 100 companies in a portfolio. It's about developing something that brings value, and 99.5 is damn difficult.
Speaker 1:Victor or you wanted to.
Speaker 2:There is a difference, by the way, between sensors and quantum computing. Sensors have the advantage today. So if you talk quantum technologies and not quantum computing, then there are advantages today and there are sensors today that would be much better than normal sensors. So if you take quantum as quantum technologies and not just as quantum computing, there is plenty that is already being done.
Speaker 1:Victor, the reason I brought up the investment news. It's twofold. One is obviously to congratulate you on that. The second is I take it as a gesture from the Spanish government towards innovation. The EU has been dismissed. Basically, america has been saying a lot the EU is slow, innovation doesn't happen in Europe at the plastic caps of the bottles and all of that, whereas we here we send rockets to Mars and all of that, whereas we here we create, we send rockets to Mars and stuff like that. But in the last few weeks there's been a change of narrative of like, hey, europe, that was a wake-up call. Wake-up call with France leading. At least France is leading the European innovation, at least in AI. Some might say how about? What do you see the regulation like in Spain and in Europe in general?
Speaker 4:in your case, you promise in the preparation meeting not to ask nasty questions.
Speaker 1:It's never a nasty question, there's only nasty answers.
Speaker 4:Okay. So regulations, I think there's my feeling there are many people talking bad about regulations, but I think it's a. There are many people talking bad about regulations, but I think it's a way to know which game are you playing. I mean, it's like a soccer match. Imagine a soccer match without regulations, without norms. I think it makes a common playing field for everyone and you know who to play in this game and you decide whether you want to play in this game or you want to go somewhere else to play in this game, or you will go somewhere else to to play, right?
Speaker 4:I think, from a user's point of view, having some clarity on how my data is used if I have some saying about how this company is going to build a specific model with this data, how this company is going to use it it's really, really good for the users. I mean, and as a citizen, I appreciate that as a company, of course, sometimes when the rules are too tough, I prefer maybe to go somewhere else, but this is a whole way that the what is it specifically? What are the balance between too much or too few regulation, right? I think in general, it's positive. I think it should be better in Europe to have a common regulation, so something more simple that applies in all the countries, instead of dealing with 27 different regulations. So some common sense there. It would be appreciated from a company point of view. But in general, I would say that regulation is right and we are in the right direction. Also, that's my feeling.
Speaker 1:Thank you. Financial services or financial companies have been early adopters of quantum right, because there is a use case there. That's pretty clear. Yet what do you think of the friction that you're encountering when you're trying to sell internally these kind of projects and investments? Because I don't think it will be easy to go to your CEO and say like, look, you have to invest one billion in producing these because maybe in a few years we'll have something. How do you present these internally? How do you sell it internally? That's kind of what I did.
Speaker 3:I didn't ask for a billion, but I think it is really important. There has been two challenges in quantum. One is, obviously, that is really difficult to explain what the value is, and two, for those who may manage to do that, that they created or generated the wrong expectations as saying we're going to get ROI from this very soon. And in fact, in the financial industry, we have seen how some companies created quantum teams and disbanded them right after two or three years, of these teams producing nothing but a few white papers, for example, and that is a big challenge because it's indeed a long-term thing. So the first point is how long-term innovation, what is the long-term innovation strategy of your company? And making sure that there is an overarching theme around that. And then, specifically on quantum, a lot of what we've been talking about here is the offensive how can I create better portfolios with better returns, or discover drugs faster, and so on. But there is a defensive mechanism as well, which is what I guess many people in the room know that quantum computers create a big disruption in the cybersecurity world because one of those niche mathematical problems happens to be breaking the cryptography system that we know today. So the argument is twofold. One is what if, in a few years, we can manage to get this type of ROI by meeting market expectations, by getting new customers, by being competitive? But also imagine all our data goes out in the wild and everyone can use it.
Speaker 3:You probably wouldn't want that, right. What are the chances of that happening in 10 years? Is that 50% chances? No, is that 10? No, is that 1%? What do you think? So now there's a really big survey that runs every year by a company called EvolutionQ, and in the last edition they are saying that 10% of the quantum experts think that there's going to be a cryptographically relevant quantum device, meaning a quantum computer that can break RSA cryptography, by 2030. 10%. Before it used to be 3% and then 1%. But it doesn't matter. If you go to a CEO and you tell that person look, a quantum team is going to cost you a few million. Tops, it's not going to be a multi-multi-million dollar initiative. Unless you want to build your own quantum device, would you be the CEO that risks your company's data? For 1% chances, that argument takes the win.
Speaker 1:Dorit, what's your view on this? Because it seems like every year we're pushing back that date. It feels like we're building the Sagrada Familia, which you know every year is like no, it's going to be complete by 1992. Should have been completed by the Olympics, then year 2000,. Then shit happens.
Speaker 3:It's going to be before fusion nuclear fusion.
Speaker 2:I have a few things. First, just to set the ground. It's my 30th year at Checkpoint and I'm doing cyber like 37 years, and I'm only doing quantum very few years, so for me it's a rather familiar. I'm new doing quantum very few years, so for me, Sagrada.
Speaker 1:Familia is like.
Speaker 2:Still I'm new to quantum, but in 2020, I was in Davos and I heard a lecture about quantum supremacy and I thought, wow, this is very long from now. This is very, very far. The presentation was kind of very theoretical. From now, this is very, very far. The presentation was kind of very theoretical and outreach and I think why I got to quantum in the last year is because I really got excited that by many indication it's becoming sooner.
Speaker 2:But the cryptography part is actually the hardest part because you have to be fault tolerant and with many qubits. So I'm excited about the advantage that is coming soon. That doesn't mean that cryptography problems are coming soon. Nevertheless, even if cryptography is broken in 10 years, there are a few reasons why companies should be worried about them now. One is that if you have data at rest that maybe somebody copied today and would be still valuable, you need to handle it today because if they break it in 10 years, it's still valuable. The second reason is that in some areas, replacing the whole cryptography after building on this industry as a basic assumption that it will always work, is going to take a very long time Just mapping it, replacing it, changing the protocols, etc. It should be easy, like a VPN. Buy a VPN from a vendor that is doing the VPN in an agile way and will just give you a PQC next month, and that's it.
Speaker 1:It must be hard first to fight off technical debt in a way. The second is like people working in these long time solutions, they usually don't work in the company to see the effect of the decisions they've made. Right Now you've been 30 years in the same company. In technology that really doesn't happen. So if I'm working on a quantum company and given the volatility of the market, chances are that developers working on that or technical people working on that, they will move to another company. So therefore I don't know how skewed or how sound their architectural decisions are if they know they're not going to be in the company.
Speaker 2:So I actually think these are two things. One is for companies to build quantum teams for the advantage that they could use If the issue is quantum cryptography. This is not the same set of people and not the same set of problems, in my opinion. Actually, most of the solutions are pure software solutions that have nothing to do with quantum, except that the algorithm should be quantum safe and there is the fine line of using QKD, which is quantum technology, to exchange key exchanges. This is very expensive technologies that is created by few. It doesn't solve like a browser to a company. It should solve site to site or company to company. So most of the solutions for the cryptography side is post-quantum cryptography. That has somewhat little relation to being a quantum expert In the sense that you assume NIST or some other organization would set the standard on cryptography. You are not going to invent your own standard, so it's a software issue.
Speaker 1:Victor. Last question before we can wrap up the panel. If I'm not mistaken, you're a technical background. You've got a technical background doing sales. It must be really hard selling a technology corporates don't understand. Like you're selling Quantum to corporates, I'm selling JavaScript to corporates, which is also they don't understand. But how important do you think it's is having this ability to speak the language of the technology you're selling, understanding what the corporations need and all your other you know the other person you're talking to and being able to sell it right? I think you did it in person, right? That's a good question.
Speaker 4:At the end of the day, it's similar to selling any type of software project. You need to build trust. You need to build trust. You need to build trust that you can deliver.
Speaker 4:And to build trust inside an organization, you need to convince several stakeholders. If you can, in those first initial meetings with the different stakeholders, manage the language and make it in a way that they understand the message. I think that's the way to go. If you can speak the sales language, like, what is the value for this company of applying this solution? Maybe not now, maybe in five years time, whatever. Uh, you need to transmit it to this particular person. But then you have technical people that maybe have different interests. You need to understand what are their interests and and try to transmit that in the language that they understand. So I think right now, since we cannot have a product that is perfectly defined and we can package it and say it has a product that is more oriented towards services, you still need this type of people that has mixed backgrounds, that they can talk a little bit the business language and also the technical language.
Speaker 1:And how can you qualify whether a lead Because I assume you're not doing sales outreach it's mostly inbound companies reaching out and saying, hey, we want to explore something with you. However, you know that a high percentage of that they just want to entertain the idea, just to learn the basics, the cost implications, whatnot but they will never get to sign the project right. How do you qualify that?
Speaker 4:I mean for quantum computing. So if you talk only pure quantum algorithms and quantum computers, that is only in sales. We call it ideal customer profile and there are really few people inside organizations and really few organizations that are willing to invest in the mid-long term. Okay, so identifying what is to invest in the mid-long term, so identifying what is the account in the mid-long term is pretty easy. Just look for the ones with deepest pockets, and these are the ones typically.
Speaker 1:Like Sergio.
Speaker 4:I mean, these are the guys that want to invest in the mid-long term like five, ten years' time again, to understand the technology. And inside those organizations they are the more technically versed, like innovation departments, research departments. These are typically the areas where you scout for quantum computing projects and then you have mechanisms like public funding, for example RFPs and grants, to try to support the business case with those organizations on how to build a project with them. Right, and that's it.
Speaker 1:How can people reach out to you and why should they?
Speaker 4:I have a guy that's called Victor Gaspar. He's a Brazilian top model. It's not me, okay, Because if you go to this guy, I mean my God, he's good.
Speaker 1:Everybody has got a doppelganger. What is?
Speaker 4:going on Too many people. So LinkedIn. My email is victorgaspar at multiversecomputingcom. Pretty easy, and I mean reach out if you want to talk about quantum computing, quantum inspired, how to use quantum inspired computing for AI, I don't know. Let's have a conversation.
Speaker 1:Thank you.
Speaker 3:How about you? I'm pretty easy to find. You can subscribe to my newsletter, the Quantum Pirates and Substack. You can buy my book, the CTO Toolbox. All the proceeds go to a couple of fantastic NGOs in Barcelona, and you can pick me on LinkedIn anywhere. Why should they?
Speaker 1:Oh, why?
Speaker 3:Because I'm awesome, that's fantastic Dorit.
Speaker 1:how could they reach you?
Speaker 2:I'm Dorit Dorit at LinkedIn. I think there is not much competition to my name.
Speaker 1:There's a Ukrainian developer that got your profile or your GitHub handle or something like that.
Speaker 2:I'm also Dorit at checkpointcom. I'm also Dorit at qubitvc and you could reach out to me for cyber stuff. That's on my side of the one side of the head. On Quantum, we are looking for pipeline investors and strategic relationships, so happy to talk to you on any of them. I'm also enthusiastic on technologies more generally, so AI and other stuff.
Speaker 1:the world is just very exciting thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. Applause, applause, big thank you. Very exciting. That's it. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. Big, big thank you to the panelists, all of them. Big thank you to the crew and the organization and our sponsors. Again, cms and Moody's, thank you very much for putting up with me and my fuck-ups for seven plus years. I'll see you all. In the next room there's a catering and the beers. We're going to have one hour for that.
Speaker 1:Thanks for the mics and for the mics. Yeah, next year with NVIDIA mics. Thanks, thanks, thanks.