Yeah, most quantum science at the moment is largely fraudulent. It’s not just Microsoft. It’s being developed because it’s being taught in business schools as the next big thing, not because anybody has any way to use it.
Any of the “quantum computers” you see in the news are nothing more than press releases about corporate emulators functioning how they think it might work if it did work, but it’s far too slow to be used for anything.
So glad we dereguled the market so everything is a crypto scam now.
🌎🧑🚀🔫
I just saw on Linked In that in 12 months “quantum AI” is going to be where it’s at. Uh… really? Do I hear “crypto-quantum AI?”
I used a hybrid of near-shore telepresence and on-site scrum sessions to move fast and put the quantum metaverse on a content-addressable de-fi AI blockchain
Quantum science is not fraudulent, incredible leaps are being made with the immense influx of funding.
Quantum industry is a different beast entirely, with scientific rigour being corrupted by stock price management.
Well, I love being wrong! Are you able to show a documented quantum experiment that was carried out on a quantum computer (and not an emulator)?
How about a use case that isn’t simply for weakening encryption (or something theoretical that they have no way to know how to actually program for)?
I’m not requesting these to be snarky, but simply because I’ve never seen anything else.
When I see all the large corporations mentioning the processing power of these things, they’re simply mentioning how many times they can get a tied bit to flip, and then cleaning grandiose things for investors. That’s pretty much it.
Use cases are generally problems with very large amount of factors that are not feasible to calculate with normal comouters, think about chemical/medicine simulation and logistics optimization or public transport timetables.
So that’s the part that gets me stuck. There is no clear answer and it has no way to check the result as QC aren’t capable of doing so (otherwise they wouldn’t be using QC since they can only be based on binary inputs and binary guesses of true / false outcomes on a massive scale). How can it decide that it is “correct” and that the task is completed?
Computations based on guesses of true / false can only be so accurate with no way to check the result in the moment.
It’s…not shocking exactly, but a little surprising and a lot disappointing that so much of finance is now targeted at “let’s make a thing that we read about in sci fi novels we read as kids.”
Focusing on STEM and not the humanities means we have a bunch of engineers who think “book thing cool” and have zero understanding of how allegory works.
Elno has just reinforced that if you lie enough to become a billionaire, that the market will reward you for YEARS. Possibly forever of you don’t let them find out your a power hungry amazing who want to ruin the whole country.
This is a piece of alleged technology that is based on basic physics that has not been established.
That does sound like a problem.
We should find out next week at APS Global if it’s really a problem or a case of Physicist Sergey Frolov, the author of that quote, failing to understand what’s been done.
Microsoft could be full of shit about Majorana 1 of course but it would be damned odd for them to make a claim like this without being able to back it up; the fallout would be horrendous.
I love these slides about how quantum cryptography attacks are a made up scenario https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/bollocks.pdf
Dude is a comedic genius
Oh I love this!
Oh you’re just loving this aren’t you? 😂
Prime factorisation is indeed nobody’s primary idea of what a quantum computer will be useful for in practice any time soon, but it cannot be denied that Shor’s algorithm is the first and only method of prime factorisation we have discovered which can finish in realistic time with realistic resources.
And that means that RSA is no longer as safe as it once was, justifying the process of finding alternatives.
I’m sorry - did you read the slides?
AI will figure it out my dude!!
Check it, yo. In the 90s all the articles and rumors around quantum computing were exactly the same. Exactly.
Whenever I hear about some new quantum computing breakthrough, I spend about five seconds wondering if it’s real and then I feel very nostalgic because no, it never is.
I just assume it’s in a superposition of both being real and not real at the same time.
Quantum computer do exist. And have existed for some time now. Breakthroughs have been achieved several times.
Except quantum computers do indeed exist right now, and did not in the 90’s. Sadly, the hype and corporate interests still make it difficult to tell truth from nonsense.
Yeah, sure they exist. Much like the ENIAC. And it’s cool stuff to work with. It’s just not anywhere close to practical. And it never has been.
If you had asked someone in the 90s if they could imagine half the shit that we have technologically they wouldn’t believe it. Just because something seems surreal, doesn’t mean it’s fake.
Whether this new chip can do the things it claims we’ll see soon enough.
I mean, I was a kid in the 90s and I feel like we’re behind what I expected in most respects.
Microsoft:
Slammed 💥 🦹♂️
🙄
Ka-POW! ZAP!
COME ON AND SLAM
AND WELCOME TO THE JAM
What do you expect from the company which promised that windows 10 would be the last one? xD
Are we SLAMming quantum computers now?
It’s laser time boys!
Slammed or lightly pounded?
S L A M M E D
Just like I S L A M M E D my penis in the car door.
Of course. Not a single quantum computer has done anything but test programs and quantum-specific benchmarks. Until a quantum computer finally does something a normal computer regularly does, but faster, we should simply ignore this area.
until it’s better we should simply ignore this
That seems like a strange comment to make. How will it get better if we don’t spend the time and effort to make it better?
The idea is not to have three worthless announcements per week. They can get better all they want, and come back once they have tangible results.
With quantum computing if you ignore it you are simultaneously not ignoring it?
I don’t think so, but yes.
That’s a different kind of quantum computer though (which i call the “real” kind). But that needs a while, especially with current risk-avoiding behavior of big corp. We are not even optical yet, not to talk about multitalents like graphene/silicene.
a breakthrough type of material which can observe and control Majorana particles to produce more reliable and scalable qubits
To… produce a more random random numbers generator?
“Microsoft is slated to back up its claims and success in quantum computing next week at an American Physical Society (APS) meeting in California.”
Well if they try to put on a show like Elon did with his dancing robots and what not we can be %100 sure it is a pyramid scheme.
