Amazon executives are reportedly downplaying Microsoft’s recent announcements regarding a quantum computing breakthrough, viewing the claims as exaggerated and lacking substantial supporting evidence. Internal communications reveal significant skepticism towards Microsoft’s research and a preference for the quantum computing efforts of its competitors, Google and IBM.
According to a report, Amazon executives have voiced concerns and frustration regarding Microsoft’s assertions of a major advancement in quantum computing. The leadership at Amazon reportedly believes that the achievement is overhyped and lacks concrete evidence to back it up.
Simone Severini, Amazon’s head of quantum technologies, expressed doubt in an email to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy shortly after Microsoft unveiled its new quantum processor, Majorana 1, on February 19. Severini questioned the validity of Microsoft’s claims, stating that the company’s scientific paper, published in Nature, “doesn’t actually demonstrate” the breakthrough the media portrayed. He pointed out that the paper only suggests the potential for future experiments, and he highlighted Microsoft’s history of retracted papers and instances of scientific misconduct in the quantum computing field, casting further doubt on the recent announcement.
“This seems to be a meaningful technical advancement, but it’s far different from the breakthrough being portrayed in the media coverage,” Severini wrote.
He also expressed skepticism about the “topological qubits” used in Microsoft’s architecture, questioning whether they offer any real performance benefits.
The report also includes internal Slack messages that show even harsher criticism from other Amazon leaders, including Oskar Painter, Amazon’s head of quantum hardware. Painter, who announced Amazon Web Services’ (AWS) advancement in quantum computing with the development of the “Ocelot” quantum computing chip, called for a strong “push back on BS statements like S. Nadella’s,” – referring to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. Painter expressed more confidence in the quantum computing efforts of Google and IBM, describing Microsoft’s approach as “next level (in BS and hype).”
Industry experts have also voiced concerns about the exaggerated claims surrounding quantum computing advancements. Arka Majumdar, a computer engineering professor at the University of Washington, acknowledged Microsoft’s technical successes but considered them “insignificant” compared to what is needed for practical quantum computing, criticizing the company’s claims as “sensational” and “overhyped.”
Scott Aaronson, a renowned quantum computing researcher, noted that Microsoft’s claim of creating a topological qubit has not been validated by peer review.
In response to the criticisms, a Microsoft spokesperson defended the company’s research, emphasizing its commitment to open publication and scientific discourse. The spokesperson said that the Nature paper was published a year after its submission, and the company has made “tremendous progress” in that time. The company plans to share additional data “in the coming weeks and months.”
“Discourse and skepticism are all part of the scientific process. That is why we are dedicated to the continued open publication of our research, so that everyone can build on what others have discovered and learned,” Microsoft’s response stated.
