131–140 of 200 posts
So when does this break crypto and Bitcoin and how to best prepare for this? Is there any way to secure at all?
Great question are people predicting we will have enough computing power to "break" bitcoin? How much is needed?
Whoever decided to make up the non-existent term "topoconductor" for the purposes of this article deserves to feel shame and embarassment (I say this as a condensed matter physicist).
I need HN's classic pessimism to know if this is something to be excited about. Please chime in!
I work in the field. While all players are selling a dream right now, this announcement is even more farcical. Majoranas are still trying to get to the point where they have even one qubit that could be said to exist and whose performance can be quantified. The majorana approach (compared with more mature technologies like superconducting circuits or trapped ions) is a long game, where there are theoretical reasons t…
I've held the same view that this stuff was sketchy because of the previous mistakes in recent history but I do not work in the field
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Every single atom in this chip is placed purposefully. It is constructed from ground up. It is entirely a new state of matter. Think of us as building the picture by painting it atom by atom." https://youtu.be/wSHmygPQukQ (~7:55) I don't know if marketing BS could get more hyperbolic than this.
Right off the bat "can scale to a million qubits" tells you it's BS since it only says what could be possible but makes zero claims about what it current does . I mean my basement can scale to holding thousands of bars of solid gold, but currently houses... 0.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
given a million qubits ... also last time I checked the record was 80 qubits and with every doubling of the cubits the complexity of the system and the impurities and the noise are increasing. so it's even questionable whether there will ever be useful quantum computers
Based on what i read it seems a lot of algorithmic work is required to even make them useful. New algorithms have to be discovered and still they will only solve only a special class of problems. They cant do classical computing so your NVIDIA GPU probably may never be replaced by a Quantum GPU.
Whoever decided to make up the non-existent term "topoconductor" for the purposes of this article deserves to feel shame and embarassment (I say this as a condensed matter physicist).
Come for the made-up jargon, stay for the horrific PR abuse of the English language like "Unlocking quantum’s promise"
Are these actually even useful yet? Genuine question. I never managed to solicit and answer, only long explanations which seemed to have an answer of yes and no at the same time depending on who you observe.
It is frustrating to try to unpick the hype and filter the “will never work” from the “eureka!”
Are these actually even useful yet? Genuine question. I never managed to solicit and answer, only long explanations which seemed to have an answer of yes and no at the same time depending on who you observe.
Each "quantum" announcement will make it sound like they have accomplished massive scientific leaps but in reality absolutely no "quantum computer" today can do anything other than generating random numbers (but they are forced to make those announcements to justify their continued funding).
I usually get downvoted when making this statement (of fact) but please know that I don't hate these researches or their work and generally hope their developments turn into a real thing at some point (just like I hope fusion eventually turns into a real / net positive thing).
Are these actually even useful yet? Genuine question. I never managed to solicit and answer, only long explanations which seemed to have an answer of yes and no at the same time depending on who you observe.
Sounds exactly like a quantum state itself! It is frustrating to try to unpick the hype and filter the “will never work” from the “eureka!”