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

Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–77 of 77 posts

Re: Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

#71

Post by anon_tor_12345 »

bawolff wrote: post #70
anon_tor_12345 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Already we run quantum computers that can perform calculations beyond the reach of classical computers" Yea this isn't true. Their 54 qubit machine can simulate random circuits pretty fast but 1) that's not at all useful and specifically contrived as a test of "quantum supremacy". 2) totally debatable whether it's actually out of reach: >In the paper, it is argued that their device reached “quantum supremacy” and t…

Ibm is a competitor in this space. Although there is some debate about google's claim, ibm is a very biased source as they have financial incentives to bad talk google. As far as point 1 goes, nobody ever claimed otherwise. Its just an arbitrary milestone. Walk before you run. Quantum supremacy is a step in the journey, not the destination. You make a hello world program before making actual useful programs.

>Ibm is a competitor in this space

I'm well aware - doesn't mean they're not right.

>You make a hello world program before making actual useful programs.

how hilarious would it be if some chip manufacturer bragged about the performance of a hello world on their chip...?

Re: Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

#72

Post by klyrs »

bawolff wrote: post #70
anon_tor_12345 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Already we run quantum computers that can perform calculations beyond the reach of classical computers" Yea this isn't true. Their 54 qubit machine can simulate random circuits pretty fast but 1) that's not at all useful and specifically contrived as a test of "quantum supremacy". 2) totally debatable whether it's actually out of reach: >In the paper, it is argued that their device reached “quantum supremacy” and t…

Ibm is a competitor in this space. Although there is some debate about google's claim, ibm is a very biased source as they have financial incentives to bad talk google. As far as point 1 goes, nobody ever claimed otherwise. Its just an arbitrary milestone. Walk before you run. Quantum supremacy is a step in the journey, not the destination. You make a hello world program before making actual useful programs.

That IBM is a competitor increases my trust in their refutation. IBM could have raced to to the same test, but on 56 qubits or whatever, and claimed quantum supremacy themselves.

I've seen a lot of criticism that DWave is only good at making hardware that's hard to simulate without doing anything useful with it. What's different here?

Re: Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

#73

Post by haecceity »

bawolff wrote: post #69
eximius wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes memory, not compute, the limit. It halves the exponent on the number of operations. 2^128 - reasonably secure by todays standards! 2^64 - horribly insecure. (CAVEAT: where the speedup is applicable, which is often hard.)

2^64 is hardly horribly insecure. Its on the edge of what a gigantic compute cluster can do. So its not secure, but hardly horribly insecure. Especially even if you can get a quantum computter working, its not going to be on the same level of operations that a million dollars in AWS credits will get you. At least not for a very long time. Besides,in most places where that is an issue, its trivial to switch to 256bit…

I think the point is it lowers security by a factor of 2 in the exponent. Going from 2^64 to 2^63 lowers the amount of time to bruteforce a key by half.

Re: Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

#74

Post by bawolff »

klyrs wrote: post #72
bawolff wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ibm is a competitor in this space. Although there is some debate about google's claim, ibm is a very biased source as they have financial incentives to bad talk google. As far as point 1 goes, nobody ever claimed otherwise. Its just an arbitrary milestone. Walk before you run. Quantum supremacy is a step in the journey, not the destination. You make a hello world program before making actual useful programs.

That IBM is a competitor increases my trust in their refutation. IBM could have raced to to the same test, but on 56 qubits or whatever, and claimed quantum supremacy themselves. I've seen a lot of criticism that DWave is only good at making hardware that's hard to simulate without doing anything useful with it. What's different here?

My understanding was that dwave was easy to simulate (albeit using a different algo than it was allegedly using)

Re: Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

#75

Post by klyrs »

bawolff wrote: post #74
klyrs wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That IBM is a competitor increases my trust in their refutation. IBM could have raced to to the same test, but on 56 qubits or whatever, and claimed quantum supremacy themselves. I've seen a lot of criticism that DWave is only good at making hardware that's hard to simulate without doing anything useful with it. What's different here?

My understanding was that dwave was easy to simulate (albeit using a different algo than it was allegedly using)

Has their Feb '21 paper been refuted? They claim a scaling advantage (in addition to a large speed advantage) over path integral Monte Carlo, which appears to be best in class for simulating their hardware. Do you know of a better algorithm?

Also, what do you mean by "allegedly"? Aren't the basics of their hardware pretty well-understood, or do you think they're sitting on a secret classical algorithm that's fooled external researchers (including Google) into believing that they've demonstrated multiqubit entanglement?

Re: Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

#76

Post by philsnow »

nlh wrote: post #56
joshu wrote: post #3

i saw a great documentary about this on hulu

Related/expanded: If you haven't seen Devs on Hulu, it's really great! I wasn't expecting to enjoy it so much. Nick Offerman takes a bit of getting used to in a dramatic role and they should have cast Jonathan "Mike Ehrmantraut" Banks as Kenton instead, but hey, whatcha gonna do. Go watch it!

I was pleasantly surprised to see Alison Pill (played Kim Pine in Scott Pilgrim vs the World) in Devs.

I guess she was in at least one episode of ST:PIC but I haven't followed up on that.

Re: Unveiling our new Quantum AI campus

#77

Post by saagarjha »

ehsankia wrote: post #59
hypersoar wrote: post #47

For those who are unaware, there's a good reason to put this in Santa Barbara: it's already the home of Microsoft Station Q, a quantum computing research facility on the campus of UCSB. When I left the math department there in 2014, there were more and more graduate students attaching themselves to it. Not to mention the growing tech industry in Goleta (the city UCSB is actually located in). So it's a perfectly sensi…

So will Santa Barbara turn into Quantum Valley?

If it was in a valley, maybe.
Post reply on HN