QTC AMA by Qubitcoin

Yeah, I mean, from my understanding, you're like a relatively new addition, right? You've just joined, excuse me, you're the most recent convert to the QTC foundation as the director, is that correct? Yes, that's true. I followed the project pretty closely for about a year and I knew the founders for several years now, but yeah, that's, I joined efficiently, relatively, not far though. Yeah, excellent. Okay, yeah, so we're already getting ahead of ourselves because I'm deviating from the format. But for those of us that are joining just now, Dimitri, it would be fantastic if you could walk us through what your involvement in QTC is, like what it actually consists of, as well as, you know, how you feel about the project generally, just some really high-level stuff, you know, tells about yourself, introduce yourself, and give everyone the downlaw. Yeah, sure. So I'll start with a brief introduction. For those who don't know. I did my bachelor's and master's at Duke University. I have like over five years of research experience and quantum computing. So besides research, I also led a few educational student initiatives while I was undergraded at Duke. We can talk about that a little bit more towards the end if anyone's curious. Yeah, as I mentioned, I knew the QBIT coin team for quite a while now at the MIT, the Quantum Hackathon. And yeah, joined the QTC just when I graduated from Duke. So like early this summer, I became like a fisherman in the world to this. QTC and my roles are primarily scientific. So as I said, I'm pretty experienced in computing research and I see a great opportunity in QBIT coin advancing the field. But I will also be helping out on the executive side because you might know David is pretty involved with executive questions for super quantum. Daniel is involved with QTC development and maintenance. So I think I could help a lot by just doing a lot of legal stuff as the network grows. Yeah. So I was prepared to say that when it comes to your involvement, you're operating in a primarily legal and scientific slash research capacity, right? Yes, yes, that's correct. I would say maybe 60% scientific 40% legal. Yeah, appreciate the breakdown. Because I think when people hear the term director or director at a foundation, they're like, well, what the heck does that mean, man? I have no clue. That seems so general. So I appreciate you explaining it. Yeah, just to make clear, I'm not like a bar for below. David Daniel and Mifayou, so I'm not a sole director of foundation by any means. Yeah, they're all very involved. Cool, definitely appreciate the clarity. Now, before we get into actually discussing the questions of which I think we picked like 10 of the many, many questions that community members have asked, do you have any project updates that you can share with us? Like what's been going on at QTC lately? Uh, yes, sure. So I think it would be good to frame the progress we are making in QTC, like within broader trends in quantum science and technology. When I first started doing quantum computing in like around 2021, we were still deep in the noisy intermediate scale quantum era. And now when you look at the recent papers published and talk to people in the industry in academia, you see the shift towards full tolerance quantum computing. And while our first, first mining task was related mostly to a quantum simulation and was inspired by this NISC projects, now we are shifting towards developing new tasks that will be relevant for the full tolerance era and all the updates you hear from us regarding this tasks of course will be relevant to, to a full tolerance quantum computation. Yeah, so as we shared two weeks ago, you've made a significant progress on task verification. And yeah, we expect to, yeah, I don't want to say a grid dates, but we are getting more ready to deploy it and hopefully this will happen in the next few weeks. Yeah, so now we are just running extensive testing to ensure the blockchain security. Yeah, is that good enough for an update or anything else you want to hear? No, certainly, I mean, thank you for sharing. Just one thing that I would add and that one of the things that's always kept me engaged with this project even though I've not really done in the trenches, I don't post in the telegram a lot. I've been watching it from the sidelines for months and months. And one of the reasons that I was interested in the first place is just because the caliber of people working at QTC is not something that you see often in the crypto space. And whenever I see a project that has serious academic involvement, I always start thinking like, is this a professor coin? And for those of you that aren't familiar with that term, a professor coin is really just a crypto project that is spun up by prestigious founders who are kind of like coasting on their pedigrees. And at the end of the day, it's something that is not, it's not usually new, it's not usually terribly impressive. A lot of the times it's just totally arbitrary and it gets brand recognition and is taken seriously by people because you can look at the team and say, okay, well, this is one of the smartest people in this field or whatever. QTC, from what I know about it, from what I've seen, is distinctly not like that, right? It's not a professor coin, it's not arbitrary. This is real scientific work that could genuinely be groundbreaking in the future. And certainly it's one of the most interesting and unique implementations of blockchain that I've seen. Not going to go into my background too much because I don't think it's terribly important, but one of the things that we've always focused on at my work is social coordination solutions. How do we bring a lot of people together around a serious frontier problem and coordinate them such that we make progress in solving or improving solutions to that problem. And because QTC meets this criteria to such a remarkable degree, that informs my interest in the project. That's why I'm here, that's why I asked to do the AMA and we're gonna crack on with the AMA right now. So are you ready to meet you? We've got the question right here. Yes, absolutely. All right, cool. So the first question concerns itself with quantum simulation progress. It says, what progress from improvements in quantum simulation are most relevant to QBIT coin and how can mining incentives contribute to continued optimization over time? Yeah, that's a great question. So I think as everyone is aware, along with some peer analysis applications, like for each source of their items relevant, quantum simulation still remains of one of the main selling points of quantum computers. Since the nature, the world we live in isn't here in quantum mechanical and simulating quantum mechanical systems classically is often just impossible to do. So developing new quantum simulation algorithms still remains like the central goal of quantum computing research, even though the first relatively good algorithms appeared as early as 80s and 90s. This is still a central research area of quantum computing research. And until reliable, large scale quantum computers become available and like some quantum enhanced POVs are possible, I think for QBIT coin, it is important to keep track of regimes of classical similarity. So a lot of such regimes are known, for example, Clifford circuits and tensor network states can be efficiently simulated classically. And the first task that is deployed in QTC right now exploits the fact that small scale systems can actually be efficiently and exactly simulated on classical computers. So when developing future tasks related to quantum simulation, we will look at other modes of classical similarity and see how they can be suitable for next tasks. So it might turn out that none are actually suitable for mining tasks, but I doubt that's the case, but yeah, so basically the next research in deploying quantum simulation related tasks will require just going through this medallys in which some useful quantum simulation can actually be done on a network of classical computers. And as I said, this is an active area of research in just I think like a month ago or a few weeks ago, there was a new regime of quantum simulation found that can be efficiently run on classical devices. Even though this field was like advancing for 30, 40 years now, those states that can be less simulated were still not known. And we expect that in the future more and more papers like this will appear. So yeah, we are keeping an eye on that. And yeah. Very interesting and potentially promising. It sounds like progress is being made very fast in this field and there are going to be some future breakthroughs to look forward to. Maybe some even that'll involve QTC. Now, I'm going to try to keep my contact or excuse me, my comments to a minimum just because the density of answer that Dimitri is going to provide is going to be quite significant. I'm not an expert in quantum computing myself. I'm just a guy here that's helping with the AMA. So I'm going to let Dimitri do most of the talking and because we do have a lot of questions, I'm going to keep it moving along. All right, on to the next one, it's about super dense consensus with the purposes. So what is the purpose, what excuse me? What is super dense consensus designed to add beyond the initial QPOW quantum simulation task? Yeah. So as I mentioned in the introduction, the quantum industry is really focused on showing first, large or at least medium scale error-corrected experiments. So our second task is that we'll be a part of super dense consensus and we'll be revolving around quantum error correction. And more broadly, I think you all know that quantum science is extremely interdisciplinary and super dense consensus is meant to reflect on that. So there are a lot of problems in math and computer science and physics that go into advancing quantum computing industry. And so just focusing on a one task for our blockchain, for our blockchain is actually where it would be very inefficient and very, would not reflect what actually happens in quantum research. So to this end, we aim at deploying several tasks to be solved at the same time. Yeah, and as I also mentioned, the current task is really like a niche oriented, niche stands for noisy intermediate scale quantum. And all future tasks we planned for them to be focused on the full-tolerant quantum computing, not noisy intermediate scale one. And this actually opens for us the avenue of new, completely unique tasks that are not relevant to NISC, but are really relevant to error corrected hardware. Does that answer the question? It does indeed, Dimitri, thank you for sharing. Moving swiftly along. So we've got question number six here, future research workloads. It says over the longer term, what types of research driven computational tasks could fit the SDC model alongside quantum simulation and what criteria would a task need to meet? So I guess it's asking more or less about the variance that we're going to see in tasks. So this is actually an amazing question. Like exactly the right one to ask because that's like this criteria is what we are thinking about daily, I would say. So the obvious criteria is that the task has to be asymmetric by that I mean that it should be hard to perform, but easy to verify. And this is why task one is limited to only small scale simulation. Like the large ones are just impossible to verify in classical devices. And the interesting trade-offs in marriage when you require the task to be useful, that's what we are working on right now. What we encountered while looking for the second task is that it is usually the case that if the result is easy to verify, then it's no longer hard for the miners to perform. And this is because a lot of practical workloads and quantum computing are intentionally designed this way. So one example I can give is this quantum LDPC codes. Those who don't know, it stands for quantum low density parity check codes. They are widely believed to be deployed on real quantum hardware in the next few years. So those are specifically designed in such a way that decoding errors is easy. Otherwise, using these codes would just be impossible in practice. So for us, this means that the task of decoding such codes is not suitable for a blockchain because this task is easy just by design because researchers want it to be easy. And for me personally, it seems like there's no way around using generic instances of the problems. So random instances rather than some structured, some like...