Seems like they're shrugging off the question of whether quantum computing has any advantages over classical, and going straight to "use it or you're missing out".<p>As far as I know, there's still no convincing evidence that today's quantum computers do <i>anything</i> better than classical computers. For example, Google made a very narrow claim of quantum superiority and even this was undermined by subsequent research [1].<p>[1] <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/05/googles-quantum-supremacy-usurped-by-researchers-using-ordinary-supercomputer/" rel="nofollow">https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/05/googles-quantum-supremacy-...</a>
At this point in time there's no one that has enough logical qubits to do a useful quantum computation. It might be a few decades before someone figures out how to scale up the number of useful qubits. In the meantime a bunch of QC start ups will pop in and out of existence like particles. Very tough field, but that's exactly where I want to see more resources allocated: towards solving difficult problems.
Is this different than what has been available through Braket? <a href="https://aws.amazon.com/braket/quantum-computers/dwave/" rel="nofollow">https://aws.amazon.com/braket/quantum-computers/dwave/</a>
Are there a lot of entries in the AWS marketplace that you can't run on AWS, but instead access remotely? I thought it was mostly things like AMIs (Windows, etc) or managed services you run on top of EC2 VMs (databases systems, etc). But this is actually hardware operated by a third party...
I wonder how far they have come in speeding things up.
A good while back I read an article that said the reviewer
was not sure what was running on the regular chips and what
was not but the performance gains (back then) was not worth the cost.