Correct, but still amazing because it means quantum internet is achievable over existing infrastructure. Not needing to lay down all new lines around the world for quantum transmissions will mean it gets adopted much faster. Even if specialized equipment is needed on either end of the cable, the hope/assumption would be that specialized equipment on either end will become cheaper as tech advances and scales upward - still a long ways off but cut down significantly.

What’s the upshot of this, even if the article’s hyperbole is accurate? I’m assuming it’s not as spooky or sci-fi as the terminology sounds to a monkey like me.

That’s a common problem with these titles. If you want to make them short and snappy, you’ll either end up with something vague or straight up incorrect.

IIUC, quantum entanglement at a distance provides for faster than light/instant communication of state changes. High frequency trading, and dark orderbooks, is the only known economic application (space communications a far off application). I’m not sure why article avoided talking about this purpose.

Quantum physicist here. Your idea is effectively correct, but the issue lies in generating entanglement at a distance, which is a gargantuan task. You can’t start with two qubits (in the current discussion the photons are qubits, holders of quantum information) and simply proclaim them to be entangled over long distances (even centimeters can be considered long in the quantum realm). One of the more promising methods to achieve entanglement at a distance is to create entangled photons locally in your friendly neighborhood lab, and send them on their merry way. Photons are incredibly good at travelling far. When they have reached their destination you are free to do the next complicated part, the ‘spooky action at a distance’ as you call it ;) I just call it magic.

The two standardized method of sending photons over earthly distances is either a) via air (e.g., lasers, radiowaves or satellite communication) or b) via fibre optics. Since the fibre optics network is so developed across the globe, quantum information engineers would love to tap into that infrastructure - which is the main motivation for the work done in the main article. Here, they proved that the entanglement survives the journey through the optical cable, which was expected (but not a given) for short distances. Entanglement is sensitive business and is lost very easily. 30 km of travel through an optical cable can be considered very, very long based on these premises - but also around the upper limit of what can be achieved without significant advances of quantum repeaters which replaces the functionality of amplifiers in traditional optical fibre networks.

I’ve heard this explanation of it once from a physicist: Imagine you have a photograph. You rip that photograph in half. Now you put both halves into envelopes and mix them up. At this point, you don’t know which half is in which envelope. Now you send one of the envelopes to Australia. You open your half. Because you see that you have the left half of the photograph, you gain instant knowledge that the right half is in Australia.

With quanta, you can for example have a subatomic particle which decays into two quanta and then you know those quanta to have certain similar properties. As Wikipedia puts it:

For instance, a spin-zero particle could decay into a pair of spin-1/2 particles. If there is no orbital angular momentum, the total spin angular momentum after this decay must be zero (by the conservation of angular momentum). Whenever the first particle is measured to be spin up on some axis, the other, when measured on the same axis, is always found to be spin down.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement#Meaning_of_entanglement

The “spooky action” is really just the determination of a particle’s spin on one side meaning you already know the other particle will have an opposite spin. This probably violates locality because you gain knowledge about something that’s non-local from a quantum perspective, even though entangled particles have to start local (there are opposing interpretations, like the de Broglie-Bohm). While in fiction this might suggest that changing the state of one particle simultaneously changes the other, in real life this just means extra information you mathematically shouldn’t have, and doesn’t really lead to FTL information transmission. What it does mean is that if you want secure communications you can use entangled particles to generate a secret key, determining the spin of them on either side, and you can be sure that they haven’t been tampered with and that the other side of the communication will be equal and opposite. It’s essentially a one-time pad.

You need to prep by sending the entangled particles (photons in this case). The spooky action is when you act on 1, you also act on the other. The useful bit is the uniqueness of the link. It cannot be intercepted without it being obvious and detectable.

Think of it like voodoo dolls. It works at a distance, but you need to make the voodoo doll using a bit of the target, then send/take it elsewhere to stab.

Monkeys learned to send signals faster. Now monkeys can bomb other monkeys they don’t like faster.

It could actually be a good thing, since it opens up the possibility of unsnoopable channels of communication, using encryption that would be disrupted by any attempt to intercept it.

You sound quite miserable, maybe you should stop thinking like this