Snarfangel: This quantum computer contains a liquid core, which, if exposed due to rupture, should not be touched, inhaled, or looked at./Do not taunt quantum computer.
Kome: I laughed perhaps a bit too much at the headline.
Saberus Terras: Snarfangel: This quantum computer contains a liquid core, which, if exposed due to rupture, should not be touched, inhaled, or looked at./Do not taunt quantum computer.And because it's quantum, it has already been ruptured, touched, inhaled, looked at, taunted, teased, fondled, molested, masticated and has reproduced by implanting eggs in your skull.
treesloth: Saberus Terras: Snarfangel: This quantum computer contains a liquid core, which, if exposed due to rupture, should not be touched, inhaled, or looked at./Do not taunt quantum computer.And because it's quantum, it has already been ruptured, touched, inhaled, looked at, taunted, teased, fondled, molested, masticated and has reproduced by implanting eggs in your skull.How many yolks in a quantum egg? None? Infinite? Hell of an omelet...
Shan: One thing that I've struggled to understand is *why* quantum computing is supposed to be such a great thing.I understand,at least vaguely enough to not go all glassy eyed, the concept behind it (that is, a 1 can be a 1, a 0, or anything else it wants all at the same time) but couldn't the same basicthing be represented by adding a "MAYBE" flag to the standard "TRUE" and "FALSE"?Or is it more like that you run a computation, and you get all possible results at once without taking any extra time? That is to say, for a "traditional" computer to run a computerized version of the cat in a box, and each run of the program took 60 seconds, you'd have to run it (for example) 4 times to get "alive", "dead", "neither" and "both" as your results taking you (again for example) 4 minutes to run, but with a quantum computer you would get all 4 answers in just 1 minute.
Shan: One thing that I've struggled to understand is *why* quantum computing is supposed to be such a great thing.
KickahaOta: Here's my own attempt to summarize what makes quantum computing interesting (which I think the article kind of fails to do, and which the Wikipedia article on quantum computing utterly fails to do):When we think of the universe, we think of exactness -- things are in exact places, moving at exact speeds. Conventional computing works in that same exact sort of way (unless the computer is broken). When a computer program is working with a number, that number has exactly one value at a time. If you need to try to solve some problem that requires you to consider a broad range of values, you try them one at a time. (Well, modern computers can usually actually try about four things at a time; but that's beside the point.)
jamspoon: TFA: Mr. Brownell, who joined D-Wave in 2009, was until 2000 the chief technical officer at Goldman Sachs. "In those days, we had 50,000 servers just doing simulations" to figure out trading strategiesAnd they still did not foresee the banking crisis.
jamspoon: And they still did not foresee the banking crisis.
Doomsday_SC: Can it run Crysis?
SwissArmyGnome: If they've really got a quantum computer in any state of operation, then I'm impressed.The thing about a quantum computer, at least one operating at the full potential for the technology, is that it really does make the regular variety look like an abacus.The entity that controls the first fully-functional quantum computing systems will be able to wield an enormous amount of power, whether that's a corporation or a government. Besides the applied applications in developing technological advances in just about any field that requires complicated computation (engineering, medicine, space flight, meteorology, etc.), it will effectively be able to break through any encryption that any standard computer can possibly use. This is a frightening, and likely inevitable, device with implications as strong as the atom bomb.Whoever comes up with it first doesn't just have the best computer in the world, they'll practically have all the computers in the world.
Nope, still bullshiat.
Quantumn computing expresses an interest in doing two mutually exclusive things:
1) create a device that can either tap directly into or mimic really well the strangeness of Quantumn mechanics
2) Use those principles to solve real world problems
Take your time machine and set it back 30 years. Everybody who was anybody was researching Neural Networks. There were computer models, and attempts to mimic them in hardware, and allusions to unlocking the human mind.
And in the end... they discovered a lot of ways the brain doesn't work, and that it takes a very long time for an robot brain to come up with 1+1=2. And so much human supervision as to make hiring a programmer to do it still far more cost effective.
20 years ago, it was evolutionary programming. Again, the computer was supposed to mystically divine answers, but this time by randomly trying shiat on a slightly higher level. Sound familiar? Then we had the decade of statistical analysis. Taking vast volumes of random shiat, and trying to make decisions from them. And, surprise, the latest trend is back to using randomness.
No matter how many degrees someone has, or however prestigious the school they taught at or graduated from, if a Compsci type tells you that randomness is going to solve your problem like magic, fire them.
Evil Twin Skippy: No matter how many degrees someone has, or however prestigious the school they taught at or graduated from, if a Compsci type tells you that randomness is going to solve your problem like magic, fire them.
Felgraf: KickahaOta:*Snip*I have one major nitpick, and that is mainly that you don't clarify what you mean when you say 'someone's looking'. That, I think, is one of the reason a LOT of people think quantum mechanics means that MAGIC IS REAL! Or that humans are super-special, because we alter things by looking or not looking at them!Though I admit, the phrase "when anything from the outside universe interacts with it, collapsing the wave form" is perhaps a bit unwieldy and difficult to explain.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jun 24 2017 19:30:22
Runtime: 0.332 sec (332 ms)