The rationality and morality of connecting quantum computers

Journal Article (2025)
Author(s)

Luca M. Possati (University of Twente)

P.E. Vermaas (TU Delft - Ethics & Philosophy of Technology)

Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-025-09840-7
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
Issue number
2
Volume number
27
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

In this study, we explore the complexities and implications of connecting quantum computers. This connection is in the literature seen as an obvious and fast way forward to arrive at a large quantum computer that can deliver the promises of quantum computing. We explore this option by understanding the conditions and contexts under which different scenarios of connecting these computers are most beneficial for quantum computer owners, be it for practical gains or moral considerations. “Introduction” and “Quantum Computing” Sections introduce quantum computing, laying out the broader framework of our study. Then “Connecting Quantum Computers” Section delineates three scenarios for connecting quantum computers: no connection, a connection that is “blind” for the uses of the linked systems, and a “governed connection” in which these uses are subjected to rules. These scenarios are evaluated against five criteria: the ability of computer owners to leverage quantum strengths (quantum advantage), the benefits of cooperative efforts for owners (collaboration gain), ensuring equitable benefits between owners (equality), maintaining clarity and openness about the connection to the owners (transparency), and preserving the independence and self-direction of the computer owners (autonomy). The evaluation does not single out a scenario as the clear winner. Rather, it reveals two significant moral trade-offs, showing that no one scenario is best for all situations. As a result, the choice of which trade-offs to accept and which scenario to choose depends greatly on the context. To highlight this, “Ethical Analysis of Scenarios” Section offers a detailed example for each of the three scenarios, explaining the reasons for choosing a particular option for each trade-off given the specific situation.