21–30 of 67 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but the service won't be valuable if the computer doesn't work. So the state-of-the-art in quantum computing is still basically "can tell you the 200th prime number, sometimes"? Not very useful.
Even if this is the case, at first people were scratching their head looking at the transistor what it might be good for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if this is the case, at first people were scratching their head looking at the transistor what it might be good for.
No, the transistor replaced the vacuum tube, which everyone was already using. When the transistor was invented everyone rushed to use it because it was clear what it was good for.
1. Do they claim that the backend is actually a quantum computer? Or are they just providing a quantum computing like interface, which is backed by a classical computer emulating a quantum computer? 2. Looking at their Terms Of Service (excerpt below) it's unclear whether you share rights any model that you try in their playground? "IBM does not want to receive confidential or proprietary information from you through…
Amazing this has not been renamed to Watson.
That's been available for months. Has anyone used it?
A five-qubit processor has been available for a bit over a year now [1]. Last week, they've announced that they'll make freely available a 16-qubit processor, but for now it is invite-only. They've also announced that they'll sell access to a 17-qubit device. [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/05/how-ibms-new-five-qu...
Something about the 49-qubit threshold or some such proclamation, so maybe that's something that will finally move the needle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if this is the case, at first people were scratching their head looking at the transistor what it might be good for.
No, the transistor replaced the vacuum tube, which everyone was already using. When the transistor was invented everyone rushed to use it because it was clear what it was good for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the transistor replaced the vacuum tube, which everyone was already using. When the transistor was invented everyone rushed to use it because it was clear what it was good for.
My point is that QC-s have the potential to be as revolitonary as transistors were. Yet we are at the level when transistors were mostly used to make radios portable. Thus it's not really justified to mock them as lame factoring devices.
I think the MASER/LASER would have been a far better example.