9 Red Flags That Helped Me Spot Quantum Computing Hype
9 Red Flags That Helped Me Spot Quantum Computing Hype (And What Real Progress Actually Looks Like)
Hi. I’m Wayne Watley with Watley Insurance Group in Shreveport, Louisiana.
While I normally like to inundate my brain with internet rot like the next guy, I’ve developed an unexpected fascination with something I didn’t even know existed until a month ago: quantum computing.
I spent the last month falling down the quantum computing rabbit hole.
Not because I wanted to become a physicist. I’m an insurance agent. I don’t speak tech fluently, and I’m okay with that.
I started digging because quantum computing kept showing up in conversations about artificial intelligence, energy limits, cryptography, and the future of complex systems. Most tech trends I research turn out to be nothing burgers after about five minutes. This one didn’t.
What became obvious very quickly was this:
The gap between what quantum computing can actually do today and what companies claim it can do is staggering.
After reading dozens of articles, watching technical breakdowns, and asking more than a few embarrassing questions, I developed a personal filter—a set of red flags that help me separate genuine progress from marketing theater.
If you’re trying to make sense of quantum computing headlines without earning a physics degree, this is what I now watch for.
Red Flag #1: “Quantum Supremacy” Claims Keep Getting Debunked
Back in 2019, Google announced quantum supremacy. Their Sycamore processor completed a calculation in 200 seconds that they claimed would take a classical supercomputer 10,000 years.
Impressive… until it wasn’t.
IBM quickly disputed the claim, arguing the same task could be done on a classical computer in about 2.5 days. By 2024, Chinese researchers using 512 GPUs completed the calculation in roughly 15 hours. They estimated an exaflop supercomputer could do it in seconds.
The pattern became clear. Companies announce breakthroughs using problems designed to make quantum look good. Then classical computing catches up.
Now, when I hear “quantum supremacy,” my first question is simple:
how long until a regular computer does it faster?
Red Flag #2: Wildly Different Timelines From People Who Should Know
NVIDIA’s Jensen Huang suggested quantum computers might take 20 years to become broadly useful—then softened his stance months later.
Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai estimated five to ten years.
Oxford physicist Nikita Gourianov called the field an “overhyped scam” driven by “salesman-type figures.”
I don’t expect perfect agreement. But when timelines range from five years to never, I get cautious.
Either the uncertainty is real—or the incentives to hype are strong enough that honesty takes a back seat.
Red Flag #3: Expert Consensus Says We’re Still Decades Away
Prediction markets tracking quantum progress show overwhelming skepticism that any system will deliver clear, unambiguous advantage by 2026.
No sudden cryptographic collapse.
No decisive quantum leap.
No mass-market adoption.
Manifold Markets participants consistently describe near-term progress as incremental engineering improvements rather than breakthroughs.
That’s not pessimism. That’s realism.
Real progress sounds boring and narrow. Hype sounds revolutionary and vague.
Red Flag #4: The Market Reality Check Has Already Started
Quantum stocks surged in 2025. Then in early 2026, reality arrived.
Companies like IonQ, Rigetti, and D-Wave saw shares pull back as investors began demanding something simple: actual, enterprise-scale revenue.
The market is moving from speculative excitement to utility-based scrutiny.
Translation: people bought the story then asked where the product was.
Red Flag #5: Systems Are Still Limited by Noise, Instability, and Scale
In 2026, quantum computing remains firmly in the NISQ era: Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum.
Most systems operate with dozens or hundreds of qubits, but those qubits are fragile and error-prone. Error correction remains one of the largest unsolved challenges.
When someone promises quantum computing will solve your business problem next quarter, this is why I’m skeptical.
Red Flag #6: The Encryption Threat Is Overblown
You’ve probably heard the warnings: quantum computers will break encryption. Bitcoin is doomed. “Harvest now, decrypt later.”
Breaking modern encryption would require millions of physical qubits, ultra-low error rates, and breakthroughs in materials science.
Fear sells. Nuance doesn’t. Watch who benefits from panic.
Red Flag #7: Companies With No Real Products
Several quantum companies have profited through speculative funding despite having little in the way of commercially useful products.
When the business model is “we’ll be useful later,” I start asking harder questions.
Red Flag #8: Cherry-Picked Problems
Quantum demonstrations often rely on problems chosen because classical algorithms aren’t optimized for them.
If the problem was designed to make quantum look good, the victory doesn’t mean much.
Red Flag #9: No One Can Factor Useful Numbers
Despite decades of hype, the largest number factored using Shor’s algorithm is 21.
Twenty-one.
When the gap between claim and capability is that wide, I stop listening.
What Real Progress Actually Looks Like in 2026
Raw qubit counts are misleading. Stability, connectivity, and error rates matter more.
Real progress looks like incremental improvements, careful research, and narrow claims.
It doesn’t look like revolutions.
What This Means for Insurance (And Most Industries)
After stripping away the noise, three things matter.
First: earlier risk recognition matters more than more data.
Second: stability beats precision.
Third: explainability is non-negotiable.
What I’m Watching Now
I’m not dismissing quantum computing. I’m just done pretending the hype matches reality.
I’m listening to cautious researchers, not confident salespeople.
And before believing any claim, I ask one simple question:
Does this help explain a real problem I already see or is it just selling me a future that may never arrive?
That filter has served me well so far.
If you’re trying to separate signal from noise in quantum computing, start there. You’ll thank me later.
About the Author
Wayne Watley is an independent insurance agent based in Shreveport, Louisiana and the owner of Watley Insurance Group. He works with individuals and business owners across the Ark-La-Tex region, focusing on helping clients understand risk before it turns into surprise costs.
His writing centers on clarity, long-term thinking, and explaining industry shifts before they become headlines.
