[lbo]

You can use fewer photons/electrons/etc to transmit the same amount of information. A qubit's state is a continuum (a superposition) instead of just on or off. If you can entangle qubits with just one photon, you're effectively transmitting a large amount of data with just that one photon plus a little bit of extra information about how Alice's qubit collapsed. This is my understanding of it at least.

It also allows for a much more natural networking quantum computers and synchronization of quantum computer state, without requiring constant translation to-from ordinary bits.

Here's a quote from the Scientific American source article discussing the uses: "Researchers hope that entanglement can be harnessed to circumvent the photon losses that come from passage through optical fibers. In a proposed application called a quantum repeater, a series of nodes, linked by entanglement, would extend the quantum connection down the line without depending on any one photon as the carrier."

[lbotos]

So If my understanding of your understanding is correct, this means we can have faster/more efficient data transfer? My question would be can you clarify the "real-world" implications of this?

[lbo]

It's all pretty theoretical at the moment, as is all of quantum computing. No quantum computer with more than a few qubits has been made, and none that are actually faster at any given task than a standard cpu.

It seems that practically this could offer somewhat faster transfers, less packet loss and thus less transfer-time variance, and less bandwidth consumption. This would all be a long way out though, and would require quantum computers in all the routers.

This news is really only interesting insofar as it's one more step toward quantum computing and mastery of the qubit.

[JoeAltmaier]

None. It takes computer-eons to entangle, then they don't last long enough to transmit any great distance.