[HN Gopher] 2025 Turing award given for quantum information science
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       2025 Turing award given for quantum information science
        
       https://blog.computationalcomplexity.org/2026/03/bennett-and...
       https://www.quantamagazine.org/quantum-cryptography-pioneers...
       https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/18/technology/turing-award-w...
       https://www.wired.com/story/a-quantum-leap-for-the-turing-aw...
        
       Author : srvmshr
       Score  : 80 points
       Date   : 2026-03-18 10:10 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (awards.acm.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (awards.acm.org)
        
       | srvmshr wrote:
       | * From the announcement [0]:
       | 
       | ACM has named Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard as the
       | recipients of the 2025 ACM A.M. Turing Award for their essential
       | role in establishing the foundations of quantum information
       | science and transforming secure communication and computing.
       | 
       | * An accessible news excerpt via CNN science [1]
       | 
       |  _Years before emails, internet banking, cloud servers and
       | cryptocurrency wallets, two scientists devised a way to keep
       | secrets perfectly safe and indecipherable to eavesdropping
       | outsiders.
       | 
       | Their 1984 work depended on the hidden, counterintuitive world of
       | quantum physics, which governs the way the world works at the
       | smallest, subatomic scale, rather than complex but theoretically
       | breakable mathematical codes to secure data.
       | 
       | The insights of Charles Bennett, an American physicist who is a
       | fellow at IBM Research, and Gilles Brassard, a Canadian computer
       | scientist and professor at the University of Montreal, have since
       | transformed cryptography and computing. The pair received the
       | A.M. Turing Award on Wednesday for their groundbreaking work on
       | quantum key cryptography._
       | 
       | [0] https://www.acm.org/media-center/2026/march/turing-
       | award-202...
       | 
       | [1] https://edition.cnn.com/2026/03/18/science/quantum-key-
       | crypt...
        
       | rvz wrote:
       | Well deserved and much needed recognition in quantum key
       | cryptography, for once not a single mention of "AI" anywhere.
       | 
       | Congratulations to Charles Bennett and Gilles Brassard.
        
       | MeteorMarc wrote:
       | Really curious, not a critique: apart from the idea of the
       | possibility of intrusion detection due to the quantum nature of
       | the communication link, what is special about the protocol that
       | is mentioned?
        
       | bawolff wrote:
       | > Bennett and Brassard, with Ethan Bernstein and Umesh Vazirani,
       | showed that in black-box setting, quantum computers would require
       | big-omega(sqrt(n)) queries to search n entries, matching Grover's
       | algorithm. For some reason, the popular press rarely covers these
       | results that limit the power of quantum computing.
       | 
       | This is mentioned almost as a footnote, but to (layman) me seems
       | much more important than QKD, especially from a comp sci
       | perspective instead of a physics perspective.
        
         | shemnon42 wrote:
         | QKD can be sold today.
         | 
         | The quantum computers are not quite large enough to search at
         | an `n` such that O(n)` is not viable but `O(sqrt(n))` is,
         | that's where there's money to be made, especially if viability
         | is defined by small time horizons. So it's a footnote for the
         | future.
        
           | bawolff wrote:
           | > QKD can be sold today.
           | 
           | It can, but it isn't largely because the classical solutions
           | solve the problem better and you usually have to resort to
           | classical solutions to solve MITM anyways afaik. However my
           | point is less about practicality and more QKD seems more like
           | a physics or engineering thing and not a computer science
           | thing.
           | 
           | After all, this is supposed to be a computer science prize
           | not a make money prize, so which is more sellable should be
           | besides the point.
        
         | shorden wrote:
         | Worth noting that this is a bound on arbitrary search, but
         | there exist some problems with structure (e.g. integer
         | factorization) for which quantum algorithms are exponentially
         | faster than known classical algorithms (a problem believed to
         | be in NP and BQP but not P).
        
       | DrNosferatu wrote:
       | The math might be beautiful, but I'm very skeptical - practical -
       | quantum computers will ever deliver their promise.
        
         | Joel_Mckay wrote:
         | Forever is a long time, but I agree people that assert reality
         | is the model are almost always incorrect eventually.
         | 
         | There is some interesting work being done, but it will never
         | match the excessive hype. =3
         | 
         | "The Genius of Computing with Light"
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbxcd9gaims
        
       | spot5010 wrote:
       | As a young grad student, I remember going to a talk by Bennett
       | where he explained how a Quantum Computer allows manipulation in
       | a 2^N dimensional hilbert space, while the outputs measurements
       | give you only N bits of information. The trick is to somehow
       | encode the result in the final N bits.
       | 
       | I felt this was a much better layman explanation of what a
       | quantum computer does than simply saying a quantum computer runs
       | all possible paths in parallel.
        
         | aleph_minus_one wrote:
         | > I felt this was a much better layman explanation of what a
         | quantum computer does than simply saying a quantum computer
         | runs all possible paths in parallel.
         | 
         | Relevant concerning your point:
         | 
         | > "The Talk"
         | 
         | > https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3
        
           | dogtimeimmortal wrote:
           | Thanks for this! I guess i need to read up on Hilbert Space.
           | 
           | ...and Shor's Algorithm
        
             | amemi wrote:
             | Don't let the terminology intimidate you. The interesting
             | ideas in quantum computing are far more dependent upon a
             | foundation in linear algebra rather than a foundation in
             | mathematical analysis.
             | 
             | When I started out, I was under the assumption that I had
             | to understand at least the undergraduate real analysis
             | curriculum before I could grasp quantum algorithms. In
             | reality, for the main QC algorithms you see discussed, you
             | don't need to understand completeness; you can just treat a
             | Hilbert space as a finite-dimensional vector space with a
             | complex inner product.
             | 
             | For those unfamiliar with said concepts from linear
             | algebra, there is a playlist [1] often recommended here
             | which discusses them thoroughly.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZHQObOWTQDPD3Mi
             | zzM2x...
        
       | RRRA wrote:
       | That's 2 Turing award for the Universite de Montreal in 6 years.
       | Sadly, I never had those 2 teachers during my years there!
       | 
       | I did see Gilles' lunch talks though, it was really insightful!
        
       | kleiba wrote:
       | Coincidentally, the same people also recently received the
       | Science Fiction Award 2025!
        
         | aleph_minus_one wrote:
         | Source?
        
           | layer8 wrote:
           | I suspect the parent considers quantum computing science
           | fiction.
        
       | 314crypto58 wrote:
       | old article but still relevant. some things don't change
        
       | matthewdgreen wrote:
       | I don't want to take anything away from Bennett and Brassard, but
       | I'd like someone to spare a word for poor Stephen Wiesner, who
       | invented the earliest quantum information-distribution protocols
       | as far back as the 1960s and published them before Bennett and
       | Brassard. He also invented Oblivious Transfer (OT) which is
       | required for multi-party computation -- although his was a
       | quantum protocol that demonstrated some of the ideas behind QKD,
       | not the classical protocol we call OT today [1].* Weisner was an
       | inspiration for Bennett and Brassard, who then realized more
       | useful systems.
       | 
       | While obviously this takes nothing away from BB's many later
       | contributions (and they have extensively credited him), it's just
       | a reminder of the randomness that goes with scientific credit.
       | Since my PhD thesis was on OT, I like to remind people of
       | Wiesner. He deserves a lot more credit than he gets!
       | 
       | * I suppose if you're a real theoretician, since OT implies MPC
       | and MPC implies all cryptography, then perhaps Wiesner's OT
       | implies everything that BB did subsequently. I'm not sure any of
       | that is true (and I've since checked with an LLM and there are
       | some no-go theorems from the 1990s that block it, so that's super
       | interesting.)
       | 
       | [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1008908.1008920
        
         | lkm0 wrote:
         | If you enjoy reading about undervalued scientists, check out
         | the life of Ernst Stuckelberg, who missed out on 4 to 5 Nobel
         | prizes because he mostly published in unknown journals.
         | https://blogg.perostborn.com/2023/03/22/hes-not-so-easily-st...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-18 23:00 UTC)