Mediaboss Marketing

PHOTO:Manuel on Unsplash

Much has been said in recent months about how new technology has helped companies navigate the COVID-19 pandemic, enabling the digital workplace and facilitating remote work. Perhaps a less popular conversation, however, is how other emerging technologies are also gaining traction at the enterprise level.

Quantum computing, for instance, is one such technology that is now regarded as likely to disrupt enterprise computing in the coming years. Quantum computers take advantage of quantum states at the atomic and subatomic level to perform calculations at a speed and sophistication substantially greater than existing computers.

While the technology is still in its early days, tech giants are taking big leaps to try to dominate the market an indication there could be broader applications for quantum computing in the near future.

There may be no way for enterprise leaders who balk at introducing new technology that could disrupt their already disrupted digital transformation efforts to get away from quantum computing. Big technology companies have already started throwing lots of money at it in hopes of playing a role in this emerging market, if not dominate it.

LastDecember,CBInsights took a deeper dive into the role Big Tech is playing and found that, like many other areas of the digital workplace, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM and Intel are already starting to carve up the market, leaving little space for smaller, innovative companies. The report is worth a look, especially for tech buyers and strategists in enterprises able to invest in quantum in the next five years.

Among the findings:

In fact, the report argues that quantum will be so important globally in the coming years that we can expect quantum-forward big tech companies, including China-based Baidu and Alibaba, to be drawn deeper into political debates around computing and national agendas.

Related Article: Rebooting the Future With Quantum Computing

The rapid pace of development of quantum computing shouldn't surprise anyone, though. In 2019, IBMs "Coming Soon to Your Business: Quantum Computing" report stated that because quantum mechanics describe how nature works at a fundamental level, quantum computing is well suited to model processes and systems that occur in nature.

According to the report, this potent capability could open the door to, for example, electric carmakers developing longer-life batteries, biotech startups rapidly developing drugs tailored to an individual patient, or more efficient fertilizer manufacturing, with exciting implications for growing the worlds food.

All of this is speculative, of course, and part of the reason why the technology is being dismissed by most enterprises at this time. But while no one has yet delivered a mathematical proof confirming that quantum computing will confer an exponential speedup for optimization problems, the report said, researchers are working on demonstrating this heuristically.

"Forward-thinking companies are already exploring solving optimization problems using quantum computing in their quest to leap ahead of competitors. Their foresight may turn to advantage after the first demonstrations of quantum advantage in optimization are confirmed," the report read.

Related Article:How Close Are IBM's Quantum Computing Predictions to Reality?

There is evidence to suggest that quantum computing is already starting to insinuate itself into the digital workplace.

Jitesh Lalwani, founder of India-basedArtificial Brain, which develops a SaaS platform for businesses, said it's not surprising since many complex problems that cannot be solved by existing computers, including drug discovery, protein folding and last-mile delivery optimization, can be solved by quantum computers. The result is that quantum computers could provide solutions to complex problems across sectors, from finance and healthcare, to logistics and space.

But Big Techs interest in quantum stems from two different possible offerings:

So, who will come out on top? Although it is too early to say this, IBM seems to have a considerable lead over other companies when it comes to hardware and software libraries. Additionally, Lalwani said, there are many quantum startups that lead software development in small companies.

Related Article: Rebooting the Future With Quantum Computing

Trying to identify a top player in a field that has yet to develop may seem a tad premature, according to tech advisor and entrepreneur Vaclav Vincalek of Canada-based 555 vCTO, which advises startups and growing companies on technology. He said that could lead some to believe that quantum computers are production-ready, that they'll replace "classical" computers shortly, and quantum computers are faster.

Quantum computers are still a lab and research thing," he said. "Even the case studies coming from D-Wave, the most advanced quantum computer commercially available today, show that the practical side of quantum computers is years away."

Vincalek said quantum computers will be good at optimization tasks, computational protein design in drug development, financial modeling, traffic optimization, cybersecurity and other specific problems. But will a quantum computer help you with your next project? Probably not yet.

There is still lots of work that all the vendors have to put in to make it, he said.

That does not mean to write them off entirely. CIOs and CTOs seeking new technologies that will provide their company with a competitive edge in five years should consider quantum computing. It may be too early to implement but definitely not too early to start planning to get ahead of the competition.

Related Article: Quantum Computing: Challenges, Trends and the Road Ahead

Travis Lindemoen, managing director of IT staffing companynexus IT Group, said it's not surprising that the tech titans have the know-how and assets to maintain headway in quantum computing.

But the market isn't exactly playing out as expected by many. The industry expected a round of acquisitions and mergers between major corporations and smaller ones in 2021, he said.

"[But] Rigetti and IonQ, the smaller quantum registration equipment continued to operate independently in 2020," he said.

There are numerous explanations for why these firms were not acquired by major industry pioneers in 2021, from a considerable increase in rivalry to the financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lindemoen said there is still potential for acquisitions in the near future, pointing to the fact that other major equipment manufacturers have entered the quantum market in 2021.

Toshiba Corporation, for example, announced its Quantum Computing Key Distribution (QKD) framework business in October, estimating that its high level cryptographic innovation for information security will generate $3 billion in revenue by 2030.

The simple fact of the matter, Lindemoen said, is that it is still far too early to see who is going to emerge as the top player in the quantum market.

Read the original:
Is It Too Early to Invest in Quantum Computing? - CMSWire

Fundamental physics research in Finland has led to at least six very successful spin-offs that have supplied quantum technology to the global market for several decades.

According to Pertti Hakonen, an academic at Aalto University, it all started with Olli Viktor Lounasmaa, who in 1965 established the low-temperature laboratory at Aalto University, formerly Helsinki University of Technology. He served as lab director for about 30 years, says Pertti Hakonen, professor at Aalto University.

The low-temperature lab was a long-term investment in basic research in low-temperature physics that has paid off nicely. Hakonen, who has been conducting research in the lab since 1979, witnessed the birth and growth of several spin-offs, including Bluefors, a startup that is now by far the market leader in cryostats for quantum computers.

In the beginning, there was a lot of work on different cryostat designs, trying to beat low-temperature records, says Hakonen. Our present record in our lab is 100 pico-kelvin in the nuclei of rhodium atoms. Thats the nuclear spin temperature in the nuclei of rhodium atoms, not in the electrons.

For quantum computing you dont need temperatures this low. You only need 10 milli-kelvin. A dilution refrigerator is enough for that. In the old days, the cryostat had to be in a liquid helium bath. Bluefors was a pioneer in using liquid-free technology, replacing the liquid helium with a pulse tube cooler, which is cheaper in the long run. The resulting system is called a dry dilution refrigerator.

The pulse tube cooler is based on two stages in series. The first stage brings the temperature down to 70 kelvin and the next stage brings it down to 4 kelvin. Gas is pumped down and up continuously, passing through heat exchangers a process that drops the temperature dramatically.

Bluefors started business with the idea of adding closed-loop dilution refrigeration after pulse tube cooling. In 2005 and 2006, pulse tube coolers became more powerful, says David Gunnarsson, CTO at Bluefors. We used pulse tube coolers to pre-cool at the first two stages, which takes you down to around 3 kelvin. We get the pulse tube coolers from an American company called Cryomech.

Bluefors key differentiator is a closed-loop circulation system, the dilution refrigerator stages, where we circulate a mixture of helium 4 and helium 3 gas. At very cold temperatures, this becomes liquid, which we circulate through a series of well-designed heat exchangers. This approach can get the temperature down to below 10 milli-kelvin. This is where our specialty lies going below the 3 kelvin you get from off-the-shelf coolers.

Bluefors has more than 700 units on the market that are used for both research in publicly funded organisations, and for commercial research and development. One big market that has driven the dilution refrigeration is quantum computing. Anyone currently doing quantum computing based on superconducting qubits is most likely to have a Bluefors cryogenic system.

When a customer recognises the need for a cryogenic system, they talk to Bluefors to decide on the size of the refrigerator. This depends on the tasks they want to do and how many qubits they will use. Then they start looking at the control and measurement infrastructure, which must be tightly integrated with the cryogenic system. Some combination of different components and signalling elements might be added, depending on the frequencies being used. If the control and measurement lines are optical, then optical fibres are included.

As soon as Bluefors and the customer reach an agreement, Bluefors begins to produce the cryogenic enclosure, along with a unique set of options tailored to the use case. Bluefors then runs tests to make sure everything works together and that the enclosure reaches and maintains the temperatures required by the application.

The system has evolved since the company first started marketing its products in 2008. To cool down components with a dilution refrigerator, Bluefors uses a cascade approach, with nested structures that drop an order of magnitude in temperature at each level. The typical configuration includes five stages, with the first stage now bringing the temperature down to 50 kelvin. The temperature goes down to about 4 kelvin at the second stage, and reaches 1 kelvin at the third. It then drops to 100 milli-kelvin at the fourth stage, and at the fifth stage gets down to 10 milli-kelvin, or even below.

The enclosure can cool several qubits, depending on the power dissipation and the temperature the customer needs. A challenge here is that the more power dissipates, the higher the temperature is raised, and every interaction can increase the temperature.

Our most powerful model today can probably run a few hundred qubits in one enclosure, says Gunnarsson. IBM has just announced it has a system with 127 qubits. We can handle that many in one enclosure using the most powerful system we have today.

In most architectures, quantum programs work by sending microwave signals to the qubits. The sequence of signals constitutes a program. Then you have to read the outcome at the end.

The user typically has a microwave source at room temperature, says Gunnarsson. Usually, when it reaches the chips, its at power levels of the order of pico-watts, which is all that is needed to drive a qubit. Pico-watts are one trillionth of a watt a very small power requirement.

That is also a power that is very hard to read out at room temperature. So to read the output from a chip, the signal has to be amplified and taken back up to room temperature. A cascade of amplification is required to get the signal to the level you need.

The microwave control signals and the read-out process at the end constitute a cycle that lasts about 100 nanoseconds. Several such cycles occur per second, collectively making up a quantum program.

Another challenge for quantum computing is to get electronics inside the refrigerators. All operations are performed at very low temperatures, but then the result has to be taken up to room temperature to be read out. Wires are needed to start a program and to read results. The problem is that electrical wires generate heat.

This means that quantum computing lends itself only to programs where the results are not read out until the end one of many reasons interactive application such as Microsoft Excel will never be appropriate for the quantum paradigm.

It also means that every qubit needs at least one control line and then one readout line. Multiplexing can be used to reduce the number of readout lines, but there is still a lot of wiring per qubit. The chips themselves are not that large what takes up most space are all the wires and accompanying components. This makes it challenging to scale up refrigeration systems.

Since Bluefors supplies the cryogenic measurement infrastructure, we developed something we call a high-density solution, where we made it possible to have a six-fold increase in the amount of signal lines you can have in our system, says Gunnarsson. Now you can have up to 1,000 signal lines in a Bluefors state-of-the-art system using our current form factor.

One very recent innovation from Bluefors is a modular concept for cryostats, which is used by IBM. The idea is to combine modules and have information exchanged between them. This modular concept is going to be an interesting development, says Aalto Universitys Hakonen, who since the 1970s has enjoyed a front-row view of the development of quantum technology in Finland.

Finland has a very strong tradition in quantum theory in general and specifically, the quantum physics used in superconducting qubits, which is the platform used by IBM and Google. Now a large area of active research is in quantum algorithms.

How one goes about making a program is a key question, says Sabrina Maniscalco, professor of quantum information and logic at the University of Helsinki. Nowadays, the situation is such that programming quantum computing is much more quantum theory-related than any software ever managed or developed. We are not yet at a stage where a programming language exists that is independent of the device on which it runs. At the moment, quantum computers are really physics experiments.

Finland has long been renowned worldwide for its work in theoretical quantum physics, an area of expertise that plays nicely into the industry growing up around quantum computing. Two other factors that contribute to the growing ecosystem in Finland are the willingness of the government to invest in blue-sky research and the famed Finnish education system, which provides an excellent workforce for startups.

The countrys rich ecosystem of research, stable political support and the education system have resulted in the birth and growth of many startups that develop quantum algorithms. This seems like quite an achievement for a country of only five million inhabitants. But in many ways, Finlands small population is an advantage, creating a tight-knit group of experts, some of whom wear several different hats.

Maniscalco is a case in point. In addition to her research into quantum algorithms at the University of Helsinki, she is also CEO of quantum software startup Algorithmiq, which is focused on developing quantum software for life sciences.

We are trying to make quantum computers more like standard computers, but its still at a very preliminary stage Sabrina Maniscalco, University of Helsinki

As a researcher, I am first of all a theorist, she says. I dont get involved in building hardware, but I have a group of several people developing software. Quantum software is as important as hardware nowadays because quantum computers work very differently from classical computers. Classical software doesnt work at all on quantum systems. You have to completely change the way you program computers if you want to use a quantum computer.

We are trying to make quantum computers more like standard computers, but its still at a very preliminary stage. To program a quantum computer, you need quantum physicists who work with computer scientists, and experts in the application domain for example, quantum chemists. You have to start by creating specific instructions that make sense in terms of the physics experiments that quantum computers are today.

Algorithm developers need to take into account the type of quantum computer they are using the two leading types are superconducting qubits and trapped ions. Then they have to look at the quality of the qubits. They also need to know something about quantum information theory, and about the noise and imperfections that affect the qubits the building blocks of quantum computers.

Conventional computers use error correction, says Maniscalco. Thanks to error correction, the results of the computations that are performed inside your laptop or any computer are reliable. Nothing similar currently exists with quantum computers. A lot of people are currently trying to develop a quantum version of these error correction schemes, but they dont exist yet. So you have to find other strategies to counter this noise and the resulting errors.

Overcoming the noisiness of the current generation of qubits is one of many challenges standing in the way of practical quantum computers. Once those barriers are lifted, the work Maniscalco and other researchers in Finland are doing on quantum algorithms will certainly have an impact around the world.

Read more from the original source:
Finland brings cryostats and other cool things to quantum computing - ComputerWeekly.com

As I discussed last month, unless we take actions soon, a tremendous amount of data that is today protected through the use of encryption will become vulnerable to exposure.

The reason that such a major threat exists is simple much of todays data relies on the security of what are known as asymmetric encryption algorithms, and such algorithms rely for their security on the fact that the mathematics that they use to encrypt cannot easily be reversed in order to decrypt. (For those interested in the details: the most common difficult-to-reverse mathematics employed by asymmetric encryption systems are integer factorization, discrete logarithms, and elliptic-curve discrete logarithms).

While todays computers cannot efficiently crack asymmetric encryption through the use of brute force trying all possible values in order to discover a correct key could literally take centuries, and there are no shortcuts to doing so we have already seen the dawn of so-called quantum computers devices that leverage advanced physics to perform computing functions on large sets of data in super-efficient ways that are completely unachievable with classic computers. While it has long been believed that quantum computers could potentially undermine the integrity of various forms of encryption, in 1994, an American mathematician by the name of Peter Shor showed how a quantum algorithm could quickly solve integer factorization problems transforming a theoretical risk into a time bomb. It became clear then that a powerful quantum computer utilizing Shors Algorithm could both make mincemeat out of modern encryption systems, as well as trivialize the performance of various other forms of complex math and, since then, we have already seen this happen. Just a few years ago, Googles early-generation quantum computer, Sycamore, for example, performed a calculation in 200 seconds that many experts believe would have taken the worlds then-most-powerful-classic-supercomputer, IBM Summit, somewhere between multiple days and multiple millennia to complete. Yes, 200 seconds for a de facto prototype vs multiple millennia for a mature super computer.

To protect data in the quantum computing era, therefore, we must change how we encrypt. To help the world achieve such an objective, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been running a competition since 2016 to develop new quantum-proof standards for cryptography winners are expected to be announced sometime in the next year, and multiple approaches are expected to be endorsed.

Some quantum-safe encryption methods that appear to be among the likely candidates to be selected by NIST employ what are known as lattice approaches employing math that, at least as of today, we do not know how to undermine with quantum algorithms. While lattice approaches are likely to prove popular methods of addressing quantum supremacy in the near term, there is concern that some of their security might stem from their newness, and, that over time, mathematicians may discover quantum algorithms that render them potentially crackable.

Other candidates for NISTs approval utilize what is known as code-based encryption a time-tested method introduced in 1978 by Caltech Professor of Engineering, Robert McEliece; code-based encryption employs an error-correcting code, keys modified with linear transformations, and random junk data; while it is simple for parties with the decryption keys to remove the junk and decrypt, unauthorized parties seeking to decrypt face a huge challenge that remains effectively unsolvable by quantum algorithms, even after decades of analysis.

NISTs candidates also utilize various other encryption approaches that, at least as of now, appear to be quantum safe.

Of course, security is not the only factor when it comes to deciding how to encrypt practicality plays a big role as well. Any quantum-safe encryption approach that is going to be successful must be usable by the masses; especially as the world experiences the proliferation of smart devices constrained by minimal processing power, memory, and bandwidth, mathematical complexity and/or large minimum key sizes can render useless otherwise great encryption options.

In short, many of todays popular asymmetric encryption methods (RSA, ECC, etc.) will be easily crackable by quantum computers in the not-so-distant future. (Modern asymmetric systems typically use asymmetric encryption to exchange keys that are then used for symmetric encryption if the asymmetric part is not secure, the symmetric part is not either.) To address such risks we have quantum-safe encryption, a term that refers to encryption algorithms and systems, many of which already exist, that are believed to be resilient to cracking attempts performed by quantum computers.

While NIST is working on establishing preferred methods of quantum-safe encryption, sensitive data is already, now, being put at risk by quantum supremacy; as such, for many organizations, waiting for NIST may turn out to be a costly mistake. Additionally, the likely rush to retrofit existing systems with new encryption methods once NIST does produce recommendations may drive up the costs of related projects in terms of both time and money. With quantum-safe encryption solutions that leverage approaches submitted to NIST already available and running on todays computers, the time to start thinking about quantum risks is not somewhere down the road, but now.

This post is sponsored byIronCAP. Please click the link to learn more about IronCAPs patent protected methods of keeping data safe against not only against todays cyberattacks, but also against future attacks from quantum computers.

See original here:
Which Types Of Encryption Will Remain Secure As Quantum Computing Develops - And Which Popular Ones Will Not - Joseph Steinberg

PALO ALTO, Calif. Feb. 1, 2021 D-Wave Government Inc., a leader in quantum computing systems, software, and services, and the only company developing both annealing and gate-model quantum computers, today announced they have joined the Hudson Institutes Quantum Alliance Initiative(QAI), a consortium of companies, institutions, and universities whose mission is to raise awareness and develop policies that promote the critical importance of U.S. leadership in quantum technology.

The collaboration between the two organizations is a natural next step for D-Wave, which is well-known for developing the worlds first commercial quantum computer and continues to encourage practical quantum computing use cases among enterprise, academic, and government customers. As the only quantum computing company developing both annealing and gate-model quantum computers, D-Wave offers a unique perspective on the importance of inclusive policies that allow for access across quantum technologies.

D-Wave continues to be a leader in quantum policy thought leadership, working to expand accessibility to the technology, educate on different capabilities for technological advancements, promote workforce development to address the industry talent gap, and foster public-private partnerships aimed at solving key public sector needs. By joining the Hudson Institutes QAI, the company will connect with a consortium whose mission is to raise public awareness among global governments to promote quantum policies and government programs which support and foster a robust quantum industry.

We are delighted to have D-Wave join us as our newest sponsoring member of the Quantum Alliance Initiative, says the Hudson Institute programs director Arthur Herman, D-Wave was one of the earliest pioneers in bringing quantum-based technology directly into the mainstream commercial sector.Quantum information science will dominate the 21stcentury; we at QAI are happy to have D-Wave joining us in helping to shape that future.

D-Waves mission has always been centered on practical quantum computing and building technology that businesses, governments, universities, and other organizations across the globe can harness to create real-world value and impact, today. Joining QAIs impressive international quantum community will allow the company to continue championing policies that will further quantum computings development, progress, and future on an international political stage.

D-Wave is proud to join the other members of the Quantum Alliance Initiative in fostering an increased understanding of current quantum capabilities and to support policy initiatives for the industry, said Allison Schwartz, Vice President, Global Government Relations & Public Affairs at D-Wave. QAI has worked with global policy makers to increase quantum education, promote use of the technology, and showcase viable use cases today and in the future. Through this relationship, D-Wave will add to the discussions around quantum policy initiatives and contribute to an expanded global understanding of the industry and technology capabilities.

To learn more about D-Waves quantum technology and use cases, visit theirwebsite. For more information on Hudson Institutes QAI, clickhere.

About D-Wave Government Inc.

D-Wave is the leader in the development and delivery of quantum computing technology, software, and services, and the worlds first commercial supplier of quantum computers. D-Wave Government Inc., a U.S. subsidiary, was formed in 2013 to provide D-Waves quantum computing technology to the U.S. government. D-Waves quantum technology has been used by some of the worlds most advanced organizations including Forschungszentrum Jlich, Lockheed Martin, Google, NASA Ames, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Los Alamos National Laboratory. D-Wave has been granted more than 200 US patents and has published over 100 scientific papers, many of which have appeared in leading science journals including Nature, Science and Nature Communications.

Source: D-Wave

Read the rest here:
D-Wave Joins the Hudson Institute's Quantum Alliance Initiative - HPCwire

Future history

The NSAs Research Directorate is descended from the Black Chamber, the first group of civilian codebreakers in the United States who were tasked with spying on cutting-edge technology, like the telegraph. Existing only from 1919 to 1929, the group decoded over 10,000 messages from a dozen nations, according to James Bamfords 2001 book Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency. In addition to groundbreaking cryptanalytic work, the group succeeded by securing surveillance help from American cable companies like Western Union that could supply the newly minted US spies with sensitive communications to examine.

The Black Chamber was shut down amid scandal when US Secretary of State Henry Stimson found out the group was spying on American allies as well as foes. The incident foreshadowed the 1975 Church Committee, which investigated surveillance abuses by American intelligence agencies, and the 2013 Snowden leaks, which exposed vast electronic surveillance capabilities that triggered a global reckoning.

Just eight months after the Black Chamber was shuttered, the US, faced with the prospect of crippled spying capabilities in the increasingly unstable world of the 1930s, reformed the effort under the Armys Signals Intelligence Service. One of just three people working with the Black Chambers old records, one of the founders of the SIS, which Bamford reports was kept a secret from the State Department, was the mathematician Solomon Kullback.

Kullback was instrumental in breaking both Japanese and German codes before and during World War II, and he later directed the research and development arm of the newly formed National Security Agency. Within a year, that evolved into the directorate as we know it today: a distinct space for research that is not disrupted by the daily work of the agency.

Its important to have a research organization, even in a mission-driven organization, to be thinking beyond a crisis, says Herrera, though he adds that the directorate does dedicate some of its work to the crisis of the day. It runs a program called scientists on call, which allows NSA mission analysts facing technical challenges while interrogating information to ask for help via email, giving them access to hundreds of scientists.

But the lions share of the directorates work is envisioning the technologies that are generations ahead of what we have today. It operates almost like a small, elite technical college, organized around five academic departmentsmath, physics, cyber, computer science, and electrical engineeringeach staffed with 100 to 200 people.

The cybersecurity department defends the federal governments national security and the countrys military-industrial base. This is the highest-profile department, and deliberately so. Over the last five years, the previously shadowy NSA has become more vocal and active in cybersecurity. It has launched public advisories and research projects that would once have been anathema for an organization whose existence wasnt even acknowledged until 20 years after its founding.

Now the products of NSA research, like Ghidra, a free, sophisticated reverse engineering tool that helps in the technical dissection of hacking tools, as well as other software, are popular, trusted, and in use around the world. They serve as powerful cybersecurity tools, a recruiting pitch, and a public relations play all wrapped into one.

The physics department, which Herrera once directed, runs dozens of laboratories that conduct most of the work on quantum information sciences, but it has a much wider remit than that. As physical limits in the ability to squeeze more transistors into chips threaten to slow and halt 60 years of predictably rapid computing growth, its physicists are exploring new materials and novel computing architectures to drive the next generation of computing into a less predictable future, exactly the kind of task the directorate was given when it first came into existence.

Meanwhile, the electrical engineering department has been looking closely at the physics and engineering of telecommunications networks since the internet first arose. As well as the issues around 5G, it also tackles every facet of the digital world, from undersea cables to satellite communications.

Some prospects on the horizon dont fit neatly into any particular box. The computer science departments work on artificial intelligence and machine learning, for example, cuts across cybersecurity missions and data analysis work with the mathematicians.

Herrera repeatedly raises the prospect of the directorate needing to develop greater capabilities in and understanding of rapidly advancing fields like synthetic biology. The NSA is hardly alone in this: Chinese military leaders have called biotech a priority for national defense.

Much of the competition in the world now is not military, Herrera says. Military competition is accelerating, but there is also dissemination of other technologies, like synthetic biologies, that are frankly alarming. The role of research is to help the NSA understand what the impact of those technologies will be. How much we actually get involved, I dont know, but these are areas we have to keep an eye on.

Original post:
Meet the NSA spies shaping the future - MIT Technology Review