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

IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

newsroom.ibm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 325 posts

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#161

Post by dumbfounder »

krastanov wrote: post #63
intvocoder wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's claim was widely criticized for being an unimportant and uninteresting benchmark, making the quantum s*premacy claim nonsense. Later research proposes that an exascale-level supercomputer could simulate it in "dozens of seconds". https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.03011

This is a funny comparison. "Here is this device with 50 components. It can be simulated by a device with 1000000000000 components, so we should not really be impressed."

When it costs a few dollars to make the latter and tens of millions to make the former then it’s fair to not be super impressed.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#162

Post by VWWHFSfQ »

This is fascinating to me! Quantum computing is such an incredible frontier. But I suppose it will mostly be used to decrypt all the currently un-decryptable internet traffic being archived at the Utah Data Center [1]. But, maybe it will also be used for something good for humanity, too.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#163

Post by krastanov »

samaman wrote: post #133
piannucci wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't get the entire wave-function as output; the wave-function is not observable. Different measurements might reveal information about certain components of the state, at least probabilistically, but those same measurements will always destroy some information. See the No-cloning Theorem.

Right, but you would still get the basis states for all 127 qubits right? And that would be 2^127 output states. Yes, you could do some sort of search maybe to find highest probability outputs only, but if you needed every output value for a follow up algorithmic step (like in VQE for ground state prep wherein you keep using previous results to adjust the wavefunctions until ground is reached), then wouldn't it be a…

You have 127 qubits that you measure and you end up with a classical string of length 127. Sure, that classical string, the measurement result, could have ended being any of 2^127 possible different values into which the wavefunction collapses. But that is no different from saying that there are 1^1024 possible states that a 1kB of classical RAM can be in. It is not related to the (conjectured) computational advantage that quantum computers have.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#164

Post by leadingthenet »

xondono wrote: post #118
snarkypixel wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best way to predict the future is to create it

Yeah, but trying to build things too early makes them meaningless. Babbage designed a computer that had essentially no impact, because it could not be built, and by the time the tech was around we had better ways to build computers. As a global effort, it may be wiser to shift focus to other things more achievable, and try QC again in 2100 (IDK, just some random future time).

Isn't the problem, though, that you don't really know what is, and isn't, achievable until you actually get there and have the benefit of hindsight?

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#165

Post by lazide »

nixpulvis wrote: post #132
krylon wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The omission of proper technical details is essentially the same as lying. Welcome, child, to the beautiful/"special" world of marketing!

Be gone fetus, for there has always been honest marketing. It's just harder to find, sadly.

If it’s below the noise floor, how do we separate it from ‘accidental (or incompetent?) honest marketing’?

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#166

Post by krastanov »

dougSF70 wrote: post #99
gigel82 wrote: post #75

No they didn't; there is no such thing as a quantum computer or a quantum processor outside of theoretical papers. I know I'll be downvoted by saying that (like I was last time) but that doesn't change facts; they have a random number generator that is capable of generating a lot of very random numbers... cool, cool, cool.

I am all in for down votes. I am not a physicist but the cost of cooling must astronomical for the output you get. CF. When autonomous vehicle technology gets released into production it is likely they won't make your car look like its wearing a dunce's hat whereas when quantum computers enter production we will still need mK temperatures for them to operate. The cost of cooling will burn the planet up further, just…

There are technologies that would not need the 15mK operating temperatures, they are just in their infancy.

The most interesting applications of quantum computing have little to do with encryption or breaking codes. Chemistry and optimization problems are much more exciting.

SHA-256 is a hash, not an encryption algorithm. And quantum computers have nothing to contribute to reversing hashes or breaking symmetric encryption.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#168

Post by function_seven »

dhosek wrote: post #139
jazzyjackson wrote: post #33

Quantum Computers sitting in their cryogenic chambers are such works of art, stacks of giant brass plates and hundreds of heat pipes (or coolant pipes? liquid helium I suppose) twisted and coiling throughout the structure hanging like some steampunk chandelier (why do they hang from above anyway?) EDIT: changed to a few direct links to pics: [0][1][2] The esoteric design reminds me of the Connection Machine blog post…

Cray supercomputers were also aesthetically beautiful machines: https://cdn.britannica.com/11/23611-050-81E61C8A/Cray-1-supe... So happy to be able to find a picture of the wirewrap inside: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e2/d2/47/e2d2...

To this day, whenever I hear the term "supercomputer", I can only visualize the Cray. I don't want to know what the latest supercomputer looks like, because I suspect it's just another boring bunch of rack aisles. Maybe with a snazzy color end-cap or blue LEDs on the doors.

Bring back the impractical, space-eating circular design! I don't care about space efficiency. It's supposed to look cool.

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#169

Post by gfodor »

oezi wrote: post #140
gfodor wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AR glasses will hit a wall but passthrough AR will be converged on rapidly. Starting 2022

Any particular insight why 2022? Hololens 2 has shown that it isn't so easy to advance the field. I don't think an Apple device is forthcoming or likely to leapfrog.

Passthrough AR isn't glasses AR, and is much more likely to be rapidly made capable. Lynx-R launches in Q1, and Meta's and Apple's headsets will likely use passthrough AR next year.

https://lynx-r.com/

Re: IBM unveils 127-qubit quantum processor

#170

Post by gfodor »

tlrobinson wrote: post #128
gfodor wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Psychadelics - VR/AR (photonic override, more specifically) - Fundamental physics (unlocked by tech)

Can you elaborate on “photonic override”? Googling that phrase pretty much just returns more HN comments and tweets by you :)

A hardware/software proxy that governs all photons you see.
Post reply on HN