Check it, yo. In the 90s all the articles and rumors around quantum computing were exactly the same. Exactly.
Whenever I hear about some new quantum computing breakthrough, I spend about five seconds wondering if it’s real and then I feel very nostalgic because no, it never is.
I just assume it’s in a superposition of both being real and not real at the same time.
Yeah, most quantum science at the moment is largely fraudulent. It’s not just Microsoft. It’s being developed because it’s being taught in business schools as the next big thing, not because anybody has any way to use it.
Any of the “quantum computers” you see in the news are nothing more than press releases about corporate emulators functioning how they think it might work if it did work, but it’s far too slow to be used for anything.
It’s…not shocking exactly, but a little surprising and a lot disappointing that so much of finance is now targeted at “let’s make a thing that we read about in sci fi novels we read as kids.”
Focusing on STEM and not the humanities means we have a bunch of engineers who think “book thing cool” and have zero understanding of how allegory works.
So glad we dereguled the market so everything is a crypto scam now.
I just saw on Linked In that in 12 months “quantum AI” is going to be where it’s at. Uh… really? Do I hear “crypto-quantum AI?”
I used a hybrid of near-shore telepresence and on-site scrum sessions to move fast and put the quantum metaverse on a content-addressable de-fi AI blockchain
QUANTUM AI? IN my blockchain? It’s more likely than you think!
deleted by creator
Crypto-quantum AI+ MaXX?
This is a piece of alleged technology that is based on basic physics that has not been established.
That does sound like a problem.
I love these slides about how quantum cryptography attacks are a made up scenario https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/bollocks.pdf
Dude is a comedic genius
AI will figure it out my dude!!
We should find out next week at APS Global if it’s really a problem or a case of Physicist Sergey Frolov, the author of that quote, failing to understand what’s been done.
Microsoft could be full of shit about Majorana 1 of course but it would be damned odd for them to make a claim like this without being able to back it up; the fallout would be horrendous.
I have to agree with this. Say what you will about MS, but it’d be odd to claim something this crazy that they can’t at least sorta backup.
Slammed or lightly pounded?
COME ON AND SLAM
AND WELCOME TO THE JAM
Microsoft:
You can tell that someone is lying about their work in quantum physics when they claim to understand quantum physics.
Of course. Not a single quantum computer has done anything but test programs and quantum-specific benchmarks. Until a quantum computer finally does something a normal computer regularly does, but faster, we should simply ignore this area.
until it’s better we should simply ignore this
That seems like a strange comment to make. How will it get better if we don’t spend the time and effort to make it better?
With quantum computing if you ignore it you are simultaneously not ignoring it?
I don’t think so, but yes.
