What are quantum ethics – and why do they matter?
The rules of the road are yet to be written for quantum computing
“Technology is neither good nor bad, nor is it neutral,” declared Melvin Kranzberg in 1986. Writing in an obscure academic journal, Kranzberg went on to argue, through five additional ‘laws’ he named after himself, that the use and abuse of technological items, from the humble hammer through to the launch apparatus of your average ICBM, are refracted through human culture and societal values. As such, Kranzberg’s laws are a warning for us all to use technology wisely and outline its potentiality for good as well as evil over the longue durée.
We should be thinking about the future of quantum computing in exactly the same way. Admittedly, the field is in its infancy – it’s not even close to the stage classical computing had reached by the mid-1980s, when the prospect of personal desktop computers in every family home sent an orgasmic shudder up the spines of many a Silicon Valley executive. Nevertheless, the tally of recent breakthroughs in error correction and scaling qubits, combined with the warning signs accompanying the efflorescence of generative AI over the past six months, has made me think more carefully about how humanity will greet the emergence of computing devices infinitely more powerful than anything that’s come before – and, funnily enough, led me to chair a panel yesterday on all things quantum ethics at the Quantum Computing Summit in London.
The number of researchers thinking about this problem is small but increasing. This time last year, Stanford University’s Professor Mauritz Kop declared in Foreign Policy that regulation of quantum computing was needed “before it is too late,” months before the launch of ChatGPT and a whole host of similar AI-powered products sent a similar shiver up the spines of AI experts and policymakers. While your average quantum computer can’t write a poem or pen a semi-original university thesis, many predict it’s only a decade away from cracking RSA and obtaining advantage in a range of niche financial and various scientific applications.
KRANSBERG’S SIX LAWS OF TECHNOLOGY
Technology is neither good nor evil; nor is it neutral.
Technology is a product of society, but it also shapes society.
Technology is an agent of both change and continuity.
Technology is a force for both good and evil.
Technology is a powerful tool, but it is not a panacea.
Technology is a human activity, and it is subject to human error and misuse
It’s probably wise, then, to start thinking now about how to channel the awesome power offered by quantum computers to benevolent ends. A machine capable of dismantling complex encryption standards or conceiving new chemical compounds poses obvious risks to privacy and safety. Similarly, the immense resource cost in running such machines on super-cooled hardware has dire implications for the sustainability of the field. The huge financial resources and expertise required for running quantum computers, meanwhile, could limit their use to only the richest companies and nation-states, widening international and societal divides as a result.
That’s all well and good - but surely all this discussion can wait until we do a better job at harnessing more than a handful of qubits? That’s a feeble excuse for inactivity, argues Marina Jirotka, professor of human-centred computing at the University of Oxford. Channelling Uncle Ben lecturing Peter Parker on how best to use his web-slinging powers for the public good (or the Bible, if you’re feeling pernickety), Jirotka is a firm believer in the principle that with great power comes great responsibility. Adhering to the move-fast-and-break-things model of development would be a failure of imagination on the part of the quantum computing community.
“Any novel technology that has the ability to affect so many people in such a variety of ways needs to have its ethical implications considered,” says Jirotka. “It is not ethical to deploy technology that can alter people's lives without proper governance structures, deep consideration of how impacts might play out, and giving broader communities the opportunity to understand and engage with the issues and challenges.”
Natasha Oughton agrees. We should all be learning the lessons from history when we failed to implement ethical standards for emergent technologies, says the UK National Quantum Computing Centre’s engagement officer and one of my fellow panellists. Above all, “it is critical to act early to understand ethical and societal implications,” says Oughton, “so that we can shape development to maximise societal benefit and mitigate potential harms, harnessing quantum computing for good.”
That means guarding against our worst instincts in whatever rules are hammered out, says Dr Joseph Spring, an expert in quantum systems from the University of Hertfordshire. “For me, the fundamental risks lie in the human condition,” says Spring, specifically “the use to which new applications are put and our preparation for defence against the misuse of such tools.”
The grand project of defining the rules of the road for quantum applications should also feature a diverse cast of researchers, philosophers and ethicists, argues CSIRO’s Dr Rebecca Coates. “Making quantum technologies more inclusive and accessible will help reduce harm and maximise benefits when they start to become part of our everyday lives,” she says.
Stan Lee’s meditations on the responsibilities incumbent on the powerful first appeared in 1962, a caption written in third-person on the first Spider-Man comic’s final panel. That same year, the University of Manchester announced its construction of the supercomputer Atlas, the first to use virtual memory. Six decades on, these words should serve as a helpful reminder to those hard at work building quantum hardware – just as they were to a fictional teenager struggling with the implications of an unexpected bite from a mutant spider.
Partner content
How do we restore trust in the public sector? - The New Statesman
Defining a Kodak culture for the future - The New Statesman
Brands must seek digital fashion solutions - Tech Monitor
Green bonds and the urban energy transition - Capital Monitor