hey thanks for commenting and interesting point. For something that’s still in an experimentation phase, any 'measurable win” beyond something like a sharper mental model plus a bit of reduced uncertainty, may be a live prototype is kinda risks being fake precision. so don't know if I could go there just to make the story punchier, I am hoping to epxlore this in next posts as I the application layer.
But I'd love to know your take specially how you’d define it... what would you be comfortable putting a number on?
Fair point. When I say “measurable win,” I don’t mean fake precision or “quantum advantage.” I mean pick one bottleneck, baseline it with the best classical approach you’d ship, then drop in one quantum kernel. If it’s repeatably faster/cheaper or gives a better result, that’s the win 😅
Absolutely – I’m saying the same thing. When I talk about the application layer, I’m pointing to the many sector-specific use cases founders can explore and baseline against classical approaches. I’m working on one right now myself and doing exactly what you describe: picking a bottleneck, testing a quantum kernel against the best classical setup, and seeing if there’s a repeatable win. If I can share details publicly by Q2, I’ll include whether it was a win or not – so yes, we’re very much aligned
“Quantum belongs to 2026” is a strong hook but the real sell is: one narrow kernel, one measurable win. Otherwise it stays a deck 😅
hey thanks for commenting and interesting point. For something that’s still in an experimentation phase, any 'measurable win” beyond something like a sharper mental model plus a bit of reduced uncertainty, may be a live prototype is kinda risks being fake precision. so don't know if I could go there just to make the story punchier, I am hoping to epxlore this in next posts as I the application layer.
But I'd love to know your take specially how you’d define it... what would you be comfortable putting a number on?
Fair point. When I say “measurable win,” I don’t mean fake precision or “quantum advantage.” I mean pick one bottleneck, baseline it with the best classical approach you’d ship, then drop in one quantum kernel. If it’s repeatably faster/cheaper or gives a better result, that’s the win 😅
Absolutely – I’m saying the same thing. When I talk about the application layer, I’m pointing to the many sector-specific use cases founders can explore and baseline against classical approaches. I’m working on one right now myself and doing exactly what you describe: picking a bottleneck, testing a quantum kernel against the best classical setup, and seeing if there’s a repeatable win. If I can share details publicly by Q2, I’ll include whether it was a win or not – so yes, we’re very much aligned