The Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology (RQT) provides an extensive array of Fellowships, enabling researchers of exceptional distinction at any stage in their career to delve into diverse RQT related topics, produce pioneering scholarship, and manage their own Projects. In addition to workshops and seminars, the Center organizes its annual RQT Conference to facilitate interaction and collaboration between RQT Fellows, faculty and thought leaders across a rich variety of disciplines.
In this Q&A, Eline de Jong, now her in first year as RQT Fellow, breaks down what led her journey to Stanford RQT and to the field of responsible research and innovation, and details the latest research findings of her RQT Project, named Equipping Society for Responsible Quantum Innovation.
How did you get into the realm of responsible research and innovation?
I’ve always been intrigued by how morality isn’t set in stone but continuously evolves. The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) really opened my eyes to how technology shapes shifts in our values – both in what we value and how we prioritize those values. It dawned on me that AI could redefine concepts like autonomy, prompting us to reassess how we balance it with factors like safety and efficiency. Acknowledging these shifts in values is crucial for ethical considerations. However, it’s not a one-way process – our values also influence the technologies we develop, often without us even realizing it, relegating ethics to an afterthought. As Collingridge pointed out, once a technology becomes deeply entrenched, it’s challenging to change it. In my opinion, responsible innovation involves actively and explicitly pondering the ethical implications of a technology in a timely manner. We need to ask ourselves: How might it impact the things we hold dear? And how can our cherished values guide innovation? By engaging in these discussions proactively, we position ourselves at the forefront of shaping our future in a desirable manner.
What drew you to responsible quantum technologies? Was there someone or something that inspired you to pursue this field?
In my previous research at the Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy, my focus was on AI and its impact on society. We referred to AI as a ‘system technology’, meaning it fundamentally alters various aspects of society. Think of earlier system technologies like the combustion engine, electricity, and the computer. These technologies reshape how we live, work, and think, making it challenging to pinpoint their precise impact. That’s why discussing the ‘impact’ of AI is complex – it’s set to revolutionize our lives in numerous ways. In 2022, Mauritz Kop (you), the Center’s Founding Director, invited me to explore the quantum realm. Delving into concepts like superposition and entanglement, I began to view quantum technology as another system technology in the making. What intrigued me wasn’t just the novelty of these technologies, but also the fact that we’re timely in asking crucial questions about their potential and the impact we desire. In essence, I believe there’s significant momentum for responsible innovation in the quantum domain.
You’re currently working on an RQT Project that focuses on “equipping society for quantum technology”. Can you explain what that means?
Our Stanford Responsible Quantum Technology team devised a framework that articulates the fundamental principles of responsible innovation within the quantum domain: safeguarding, engaging, and advancing society. Essentially, responsible quantum technology entails addressing risks promptly, involving societal stakeholders throughout the development, implementation, and assessment phases of quantum technology, and aligning technological progress with societal welfare.
In my Fellowship Project, I aim to delve deeper into these three objectives to elucidate what enables society to pursue them effectively. Regarding the goal of safeguarding against risks, I will investigate whether the precautionary principle constitutes an adequate response. Concerning the objective of engaging society, I will explore the role of technological understanding in facilitating meaningful discussions and evaluations of technology. As for advancing society through technology, I will examine the applicability of the ethical imperative to promote good (beneficence) alongside the principle of avoiding harm (non-maleficence). Through my philosophical and ethical research, I seek to provide the conceptual tools to guide responsible quantum innovation.
Could you elaborate on the concept of understanding that you introduce in your research?
For many of us, sending an email, making a phone call, or starting a car feels like second nature. But when it comes to understanding the nuts and bolts of underlying technologies like transistors, radio signals, or engines, our knowledge might not go much deeper than the surface. We typically know enough to use these technologies, but we lack a profound understanding of how they actually work. While this level of understanding may suffice for everyday use, I argue that for responsible innovation and effective regulation, we need a deeper understanding of how these things work.
However, when I delved into quantum technology, I quickly realized that I’ll never comprehend it as deeply as the experts do. And you know what? I don’t think I have to in order to meaningfully consider the ethical and societal implications. But this leads to a lingering question: How much do we really need to understand about how a quantum computer functions before we are well-equipped to dive into the ethical, legal, societal, and policy aspects?
In the first phase of my Project, I aim to address this very question. Generally, I propose that the kind of understanding required for people to engage with a technology involves the ability to reason about how it achieves its goals. This understanding not only supports practical usage but also allows for envisioning new applications and assessing their impacts. Only when we can discern the relationship between an objective and the way technology accomplishes it, are we truly equipped to critically engage with it.
What are your views on the importance of building bridges between academia, industry, policy, and the general public?
Without bridges, we are all isolated on our islands. If I specifically look at academia, I learned that—notwithstanding the beauty of doing research—impact is made outside of the walls of my university office. While we as researchers may produce outstanding papers with insightful analyses and valuable recommendations, they remain futile if not put into practice. My time at the Scientific Council for Government Policy in the Netherlands taught me the importance of not just “launching” your work into the world, but also ensuring its successful “landing.” By this, I mean anticipating who should act based on your research, considering why they would do so, and how they could effectively implement it.
I might come up with a comprehensive, literature-based analysis outlining the steps for a responsible transition to quantum-safe cryptography, but if there’s no sense of responsibility, urgency, or simply incentive to act accordingly, my analysis serves little purpose. If I want my research to have a meaningful societal impact, I believe it’s essential to involve societal actors right from the outset—to ensure that my research questions resonate with real-world needs and that the solutions I offer align with real-world capabilities.
What are your hobbies and hidden talents?
As a researcher, my work typically takes place in my head and behind my desk. It is essential for me to balance this with spending time outdoors. Although being a naturally active person who loves being in nature, I had a surprising achievement in 2019 when I successfully summitted Europe’s highest mountain: Mont Blanc. It was a moment where I found out about a quality within myself – the ability to confront and channel my fear into focus, determination, and energy. And just between us, I like to think of myself as a pretty good dog whisperer too.
What drives you at the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology?
Sometimes I’m asked about the biggest risk of quantum technology. While there’s the looming threat to cybersecurity from large-scale quantum computers and potential misuse by adversaries, I honestly believe the most significant risk lies in overlooking the chance to harness the novel capabilities of quantum technology for positive ends. We’re grappling with monumental challenges, with climate change topping the list, and my deepest concern is that instead of innovating towards solutions, we’ll end up digging ourselves deeper into existing problems. However, on the top of Mont Blanc, I’ve come to realize that fear can be transformed into a driving force. So, I’m committed to aligning quantum innovation with moral ambition. Will we harness quantum technology to bolster the livestock industry, or will we utilise it to eliminate the need for animal experiments? My goal is to play a part in linking quantum capabilities to a more sustainable and ethical treatment of our planet and its inhabitants. I’m very grateful that the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology is fostering this aspiration!