Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer • Hacker News Board

Re: Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer

#231

Post by mistermann » Tue, Jul 04, 2023, 6:33 PM UTC

weard_beard wrote: post #216

mistermann wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some bits can even be flipped in broad daylight while everyone's watching. One of the most popular ways to flip bits is by telling stories in which the bits have been flipped.

The power of stories is that you are alone in the telling of them. The survival, your own undressing, or redressing, the terrible fury of living life, constrained to the teacup of bedtime for children. The power that storytelling takes is a kind of leadership that is grudgingly respected, like a real bastard's funeral. It doesn't have much to do with physics.

> The power of stories is that you are alone in the telling of them.

I don't know about you, but I've noticed a pattern where the stories people tell on social media and even in person often have an uncanny resemblance to the stories that are told the day before in mainstream media.

Heck, if everyone plays their cards right, you can often even get a nice (profitable) war going!

> It doesn't have much to do with physics.

Mostly agree (the jury is still out on the hard problem of consciousness), it's metaphysics... and we all "know" what that "means": "woo woo"...or so they say.

And, that realm often leaks into the physical realm, much to our horror/delight/confusion.

Re: Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer

#232

Post by zerodensity » Tue, Jul 04, 2023, 8:54 PM UTC

bawolff wrote: post #224

pclmulqdq wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To load those bits into your quantum computer, you need to spend O(n) time. Most practical searches are O(n).

Not neccesarily, you can calculate them on the fly.

How so you mean calculating them on the fly? You need to at least load the data to perform operations on it.

Re: Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer

#233

Post by jabbany » Tue, Jul 04, 2023, 11:07 PM UTC

dataflow wrote: post #229

jabbany wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a quantum computing researcher but I have friends who work on it. The way they've described this to me (answering a question around "how does one know what quantum stuff is bs") was that it's largely a set of known "hard" questions where we've empirically found hard for classical computing but we maybe could solve with quantum. In a way it's been described as similar to crypto primitives or P?=NP problems whe…

> where we've empirically found hard for classical computing but we maybe could solve with quantum Are we talking complexity classes here, or just "problems we've found hard in practice, but that which may in fact be in P even if P != NP"? Like I would've thought that solving BQP problems like integer factorization would be the criterion (since they're proven to be faster under QC assuming P != NP etc.). But that's e…

Based on what I've heard, I don't think the bar is as high as "formally proven to lack a classical solution" for the whole field. Then again, the caveat is of the two people I know, one is doing cryptography/security in a quantum setting and the other is working on quantum related HW... so take this with as much salt as needed.

Re: Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer

#234

Post by dataflow » Tue, Jul 04, 2023, 11:10 PM UTC

jabbany wrote: post #233

dataflow wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> where we've empirically found hard for classical computing but we maybe could solve with quantum Are we talking complexity classes here, or just "problems we've found hard in practice, but that which may in fact be in P even if P != NP"? Like I would've thought that solving BQP problems like integer factorization would be the criterion (since they're proven to be faster under QC assuming P != NP etc.). But that's e…

Based on what I've heard, I don't think the bar is as high as "formally proven to lack a classical solution" for the whole field. Then again, the caveat is of the two people I know, one is doing cryptography/security in a quantum setting and the other is working on quantum related HW... so take this with as much salt as needed.

I see, thanks!

Re: Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer

#235

Post by bawolff » Wed, Jul 05, 2023, 3:45 AM UTC

zerodensity wrote: post #232

bawolff wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not neccesarily, you can calculate them on the fly.

How so you mean calculating them on the fly? You need to at least load the data to perform operations on it.

Grover's algorithm does not require you to load the data to be searched through if it can be generated instead. Grover's algorithm is not neccesarily searching through a list but searching through the output of a function. Sure if your function is an array index operator you need to load the underlying data, but many large search problems are not that.

Re: Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer

#236

Post by zerodensity » Wed, Jul 05, 2023, 9:23 AM UTC

bawolff wrote: post #235

zerodensity wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so you mean calculating them on the fly? You need to at least load the data to perform operations on it.

Grover's algorithm does not require you to load the data to be searched through if it can be generated instead. Grover's algorithm is not neccesarily searching through a list but searching through the output of a function. Sure if your function is an array index operator you need to load the underlying data, but many large search problems are not that.

That clears that up thanks.

Re: Google claims to have proved its supremacy with new quantum computer

#237

Post by Viliam1234 » Wed, Jul 05, 2023, 8:14 PM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #59

wholinator2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are these capabilities of which you speak? Or have i missed the sarcasm

Well, generate reality for one. It's not a trivial detail, but it tends to be dismissed or taken for granted (or downvoted lol). Someone may venture into this territory some day, and perhaps that someone will find some travelling companions to make the journey more exciting and productive....time will tell!

> (or downvoted lol)

Just use your quantum mind to change that downvote to upvote, problem solved.