Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Quantum Development Kit preview

blogs.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#41

Post by shoyer »

Eridrus wrote: post #32
ahelwer wrote: post #22

I'm legitimately excited by quantum computing. The field is moving SO much faster than popular knowledge, which seems to believe a quantum computer will arrive at the same time as a workable fusion reactor. Real quantum computers exist RIGHT NOW. You can even write a program and run it on one from IBM![0] Google and Microsoft are both dumping resources into creating commercially-available quantum computers. Google sa…

Your comment made me wonder: would quantum computing help with simulating plasma dynamics in a way that would help us improve fusion reactors?

No, plasma physics is one of the few areas of modern physics in which quantum mechanics is not relevant: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/3nohxy/plasma_p...

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#42

Post by seandougall »

IncRnd wrote: post #12
zitterbewegung wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks horrible but on the other hand it will be really easy to google. Also, it is an injoke for people familiar with quantum mechanics.

> it will be really easy to google Hopefully :) Sometimes it gets spelled as LIQ𝑈𝑖⏐〉 ( http://stationq.github.io/Liquid/ ) which is different from LIQUi|> ( https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/language-in... ), which is different from LIQUID. It all depends on how Google feels about qubits on any given day.

But can you spell it all three ways at the same time?

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#43

Post by westoncb »

Anyone know how this might impact constraint satisfaction algorithms? Is it possible we'd see something like Prolog being orders of magnitude faster? (Assuming it were re-written for a quantum computer, maybe using something like Q#.)

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#44

Post by westoncb »

ahelwer wrote: post #22

I'm legitimately excited by quantum computing. The field is moving SO much faster than popular knowledge, which seems to believe a quantum computer will arrive at the same time as a workable fusion reactor. Real quantum computers exist RIGHT NOW. You can even write a program and run it on one from IBM![0] Google and Microsoft are both dumping resources into creating commercially-available quantum computers. Google sa…

I wonder how to reconcile the apparently exciting stuff going on in quantum computing with a conversation I had with a Harvard quantum computing PhD last year (I know very little about the field myself, so I unfortunately can't comment much on specifics here—I just know the guy was legit because of other people I knew who worked with him): he said he'd chosen the wrong field 'cause it has basically played out that quantum computing is intrinsically more limited and less exciting than what people had hoped for, and that a lot of big companies were starting to realize they'd wasted tons of money on it. (This was admittedly all being stated in an exaggerated and joking style, but he did seem serious about the basic idea.) Has there been something in the last year that's changed things? Or maybe his opinion was just an outlier?

Edit: that could've been up to two years ago, thinking about it.

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#45

Post by Eridrus »

shoyer wrote: post #41
Eridrus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment made me wonder: would quantum computing help with simulating plasma dynamics in a way that would help us improve fusion reactors?

No, plasma physics is one of the few areas of modern physics in which quantum mechanics is not relevant: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/comments/3nohxy/plasma_p...

Well that's a bummer.

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#46

Post by snaky »

pjmlp wrote: post #29
dsp1234 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Real quantum computers exist RIGHT NOW. You can even write a program and run it on one from IBM!" Let's be a bit realistic. It's a 5 qubit processor. I'm not sure how excited the general population were when the first 5 bit processor was available. There is still a ways to go before actually useful quantum computers are generally available. "You have access to one now with the Quantum Experience. It is small at the…

At least they seemed pretty exited with Intel 4004.

Did they actually, outside of happy Busicom calculator users? Even 8008 "looked okay, but nobody used it" - http://ethw.org/Oral-History:Masatoshi_Shima

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#47

Post by dangirsh »

wasx wrote: post #33
2_listerine_pls wrote: post #31

What other languages are there?

Hopefully once the technology matures and becomes more widespread we get a FOSS alternative. I don't trust Microsoft and would not want to work with a stack that is monopolized by them

I think this is crucial.

Rigetti Computing (where I work) has open-sourced several packages related to quantum programming, including pyQuil: https://github.com/rigetticomputing/pyquil

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#48

Post by [deleted] »

IncRnd wrote: post #12
zitterbewegung wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks horrible but on the other hand it will be really easy to google. Also, it is an injoke for people familiar with quantum mechanics.

> it will be really easy to google Hopefully :) Sometimes it gets spelled as LIQ𝑈𝑖⏐〉 ( http://stationq.github.io/Liquid/ ) which is different from LIQUi|> ( https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/language-in... ), which is different from LIQUID. It all depends on how Google feels about qubits on any given day.

[deleted]

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#49

Post by [deleted] »

IncRnd wrote: post #12
zitterbewegung wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks horrible but on the other hand it will be really easy to google. Also, it is an injoke for people familiar with quantum mechanics.

> it will be really easy to google Hopefully :) Sometimes it gets spelled as LIQ𝑈𝑖⏐〉 ( http://stationq.github.io/Liquid/ ) which is different from LIQUi|> ( https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/language-in... ), which is different from LIQUID. It all depends on how Google feels about qubits on any given day.

[deleted]

Re: Quantum Development Kit preview

#50

Post by pjmlp »

snaky wrote: post #46
pjmlp wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least they seemed pretty exited with Intel 4004.

Did they actually, outside of happy Busicom calculator users? Even 8008 "looked okay, but nobody used it" - http://ethw.org/Oral-History:Masatoshi_Shima

I guess I misread it.

I wanted to convey that there were some groups actually happy about it.

Post reply on HN