Thanks for inviting me to share my experience with you today.
My name's Andrew Fursman and I'm the CEO of 1QBit. We're a Canadian company focused on a software-first approach to quantum computing. While many companies take a qubit-first approach—where they select photonics, ion traps or superconducting technologies, usually matching their founder's expertise and then building the best possible devices, hoping to win the hardware race—1QBit starts with an industrial need. We conceive of new algorithms useful to solving specific industrial problems, and then we select the computing technology that's best suited to compute the answer to those problems, usually based on evidence.
We recognize that a computer is only as valuable as the problems it solves, so we partner with hardware companies to ensure that their devices are designed and optimized to solve specific, important problems.
By way of background, I've studied economics at the University of Waterloo, political science and philosophy of science at UBC, financial engineering at Stanford and Hong Kong, and I'm now on the Singularity University faculty in Silicon Valley, where I'm focused on advanced computing.
I was previously co-founder of the Nasdaq-traded company Satellogic, where we put a large number of small satellites in low-earth orbit for Earth observation. I'm a founder of Minor Capital, where we invested in B.C. deep-tech companies, including General Fusion, D-Wave and Kindred. I'm also an adviser in Cambium Capital, focused on advanced computing and investing in companies like IonQ and Seeqc in the quantum world, and Groq in the AI space. I'm an adviser to NATO's one-billion euro deep-tech investment fund. I'm also the industry board chair of Mitacs, as well as a member of the World Economic Forum's council on the future of computing.
I've studied and invested in many deep technologies. I've learned a lot, enjoyed some substantial returns and I'm delighted to share a few ideas with you today.
I wanted to start by making two statements. One, quantum computing is an important industry for Canada's future. Two, quantum computing is not yet industrially useful. These aren't incompatible ideas. There's a lot of hype around quantum technologies and computing right now, because of the transformative potential for a new form of information processing.
Quantum computing is the first revolution in computing, and its development is happening right now. However, because quantum computing is not yet competitive against traditional computers, it's hard to summon the political will to pragmatically support this infant industry, despite the fact that the infant industry argument is one of the most solid economic cases for government investment.
It's important to recognize that promoting the procurement of current quantum computers is not a very helpful way to grow domestic quantum capabilities. I'd like to share why, to help frame how the government can be more helpful.
At Satellogic, we originally envisioned a constellation of hundreds of satellites working together, but at first, we were only able to launch a small number of individual satellites. Individual satellites are less useful than an entire constellation, but they're still able to provide value individually, observing Earth, but revisiting every place on Earth less frequently than a full constellation.
Quantum computing's a little different. It's at a bit of an earlier state. We're not building small, useful quantum computers that will one day become large quantum computers. We're still building the theory and components that will one day become the smallest useful quantum computers. Half of a quantum computer is basically a pile of qubits. It's like a fence that goes halfway around your farm. Half of the satellite constellation is roughly half as useful as the full constellation, but half of a fence is about as useful as no fence at all. While every fence is at some point half of a fence, it doesn't have real value until it's complete.
The current misconceptions around the state of quantum computing mean that as governments look to support the infant quantum computing industry, they are frequently trying to incentivize domestic consumption of current quantum computers. This is kind of like asking farmers to install new half-fences around their fields.
Quantum computers are not yet industrially useful, and they aren't expected to be for a few years. To recognize the current realities and truly help incubate infant industries, governments shouldn't encourage the adoption of half-fence solutions today, but should instead focus on incentivizing the long-term development of full quantum systems in Canada, including talent development, software design, architectures, control and manufacturing methods.
Pushing quantum computers on industrial users today is like pushing half-fences on farmers.
If governments really want to support the infant quantum computing industry, governments should know that the current goal within our industry is to make quantum computers better than classical computers at any industrially usable task.
Until then, consistent and reliable direct investment in technology development is needed, similar to the great work happening in Quebec—building a formal quantum innovation zone around Sherbrooke—and in many other regions around the world. It's direct investment like this that will help Canadian technology companies weather the hype cycles and business cycles over the next decade, and focus on building real technology over the long term instead of generating absurd short-term marketing hype, and help Canada incubate this infant quantum industry until quantum computers begin to compete against traditional classical computers by delivering real industrial value.
To echo Ray Laflamme from earlier this week, quantum computing is happening now, but it's a marathon, not a sprint.
I hope Canada's national quantum strategy can be focused around winning the game, not the match.
I really appreciate your time today and I look forward to our discussion.
Thank you.