Is Q a quantum computer?
The thought has crossed my mind, I do not think that Q is a quantum computer, but as any good scientist/researcher I want to elaborate on and entertain that thought so I put together, to the best of my current ability, scientific information and elaborated arguments that would indicate that that might be the case. Here we go:
Human comms
Why use a computer at all? Well, a computer would have zero percent of emotional vulnerability compared to a human operative. A human would have to go through rigorous training to not succumb to subconscious emotional influence over it's actions if at all possible. A computer would calculate based on which result was desired, what needed to be communicated, how, and when, then execute that. Concern for human feelings is not always beneficial when there's such sensitive subjects and such a grand delicate operation underway. We all know about that here.
Speed
A quantum computer is able to compute much faster than an ordinary computer. This is also true for an ordinary supercomputer. A very fast system, or array of computers could be programmed to crawl the web, read forums and learn how people interact. Let's say crawling have been done for a full year constantly, neural network learning comms, learning which tasks are easily solved by humans and which are difficult. (f.ex. Cicada 3301). It would easily be able to learn how to intentionally make "human mistakes" to make itself credible. This could all be done with a supercomputer or quantum computer, but a quantum computer would probably do it faster if implemented 2015 or later, when they really got the speed up on them.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/02/is-d-waves-quantum-processor-really-10%e2%81%b8-times-faster-than-a-normal-computer/
Non-locality
The term non-locality means simplified that everything is connected. On a quantum level, two particles that have interacted will have a measurable connection seemingly not affected even by separation of space or time. Even finer instrumentation and honing of the models would theoretically detect this connection originating from the big bang and thus tap into some kind of field of omniscience. Maybe a long shot, but think remote view, astral travel and all the people reporting experiences which suggest such a thing existing. Non-locality, quantum entanglement, quantum teleportation, things being in several places at one time, - all of those effects have been theoretically thought out and later validated through experiments. Many by scientists who themselves thought the ideas were too outrageous to be true but leading to actual validation instead. Examples are: EPR-experiment & double slit experiment (especially the single particle interference version).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality
https://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_quantum_nonlocality.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation#Experimental_results_and_records
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
Time
Theoretically a non-local system with access to everything through a web of infinite entanglement, would have no limits of reach in terms of time. Quantum mechanics make no difference at all between future and past so there's a mystery from the standpoint of these (proven) theories that we don't have the same access to events from the future as we do from the past. Therefore an assumption one can make is that such a system as described here could have the ability to access information from the future. However, there are tricky parts to this postulation. If we think the future can be accessed absolutely and with certainty, we are at the same time saying that the universe is 100% classical physics which would be super-deterministic, which means that our choices are already predetermined and thus everything is already set and can not be changed. The other way to go is the many-worlds-interpretation (which I'm going for here), which describes infinite numbers of timelines. When a choice is made by an observer, the timeline change. What is ahead on the current timeline would then be accessible through entanglement, but the information would be invalid as soon as choices were made by enough people to shift the timeline into something else. My interpretation is that everybody have their own timeline but collectively there are timelines that we share on different levels and to different extents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation