/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.16103102]

Why was quantum computing a flop?

[Anonymous No.16103116]

It couldn't run Doom.

[Anonymous No.16103141]

>>16103102
It was taken over by career academics, pr management and government agents. It's a big money blackhole. No one is working on an actual quantum computer. They don't even know what they are doing.

>B b but quantums are real ... You are a quantum denier!
I repeat: No one is working on an actual quantum computer.

>B b but why would they spend so much money on a scam?
Yeah, like big scams didn't exist in our history before.

>B b but microsoft has a qc. You can access it online.
What you can access online is a really expensive random number generator.

>B b but research takes time and money.
Yeah its been 30 years now and hundreds of billions of dollars and still nothing. How do you tell if its a really long research or just a scam to steal taxpayer money and hype up share prices?

[Anonymous No.16103144]

[Anonymous No.16103158]

>>16103144
They show these steampunk chandeliers since 10 years now. Can we compare the different chandeliers and point out how they are better than the previous ones?

[Anonymous No.16103161]

>>16103144
>even the diversity hires have to do some work
impressive

[Anonymous No.16103209]

>>16103144
This makes incels rage and seething lmao. What an absolute qt

[Anonymous No.16103231]

>>16103141
You're right.

Also, I want to fuck her butthole. Her sentence should have been three years as a free-to-use cum dumpster. Just chain her to a bus shelter somewhere in San Laredo. Corrections officers can come by to feed her and hose her off a couple times a week.

[Anonymous No.16103253]

>>16103144
>Walking while emailing
What the fuck

[Anonymous No.16103257]

>>16103158
My Tsukiyomi no chandalier contains enough qubits to house a whole universe and plunge you into any fantasy of my design, GIRD THY LOINS!

[Anonymous No.16103261]

>>16103102
Because the glowies have them.
In fact, even high level research into HPCs haven't been published in the last decade and a half.
There is no reason why civillians should know about them.

[Anonymous No.16103262]

>>16103102
quantum computing is a flop because it's theoretical nonsenses from the start. the nanometer world isn't random, it just appears random because we don't have enough global information of the universe to compute the next state correctly.
there isn't a reason why locality should be a fundamental rule, it's just tranny physicists put that shit to the equations otherwise they won't be able to solve the math

[Anonymous No.16103286]

>>16103102
nobody can tell you because nobody on 4chan knows the simplest quantum computer works.
Just ask, you will hear about the Qbits and many algorithms, not a thing about actual processing where a Qbit or several Qbits produce an outcome
Like addition, no one in 4chan knows how to add two qbits to create a resultant qbit

[Anonymous No.16103293]

>>16103286
Speak for yourself, zoomer.

[Anonymous No.16103311]

>>16103102
NISQ turned out to be completely fucking useless and quantum error correction is still far off.

[Anonymous No.16103312]

>>16103293
>Speak for yourself, zoomer.
I speak for everyone. No one knows how to do any computation with quantum computers. This includes you.

[Anonymous No.16103343]

>>16103231
>Also, I want to fuck her butthole.
She looks like Mark Cuckerberg in drag. I wouldn't even touch her with a stick.

[Anonymous No.16103346]

>>16103343
It's not about desire, it's about humiliation.

[Anonymous No.16103347]

>>16103257
When you will simulate the boobie universe please post screenshots!

[Anonymous No.16103349]

>>16103346
Is it humiliation for her or for you? I dont fully get your fetish.

[Anonymous No.16103353]

>>16103312
I know a lot about quantum computing though. Does this make you seethe?

[Anonymous No.16103377]

>>16103102
Because it lack raw computing power and its only upside was like a handful of crypto-breaking algorithms being able to exploit the way it handle information to take massive shorcuts.
They are nowhere near close to give it enough raw power that those "cheat code" algos are actually faster than what regular computers can do.
... and the coup-de-grace is that cryptographyfags started working on quantum-computing-proof method as soon as they heard about it, and they are progressing much faster - which mean the entire endeavor is dead on arrival.

[Anonymous No.16103407]

>>16103377
>Because it lack raw computing power and its only upside was like a handful of crypto-breaking algorithms being able to exploit the way it handle information to take massive shorcuts.
It doesn't have any kind of computing power. It can't break anything.

[Anonymous No.16103412]

>>16103353
I dont believe you. If you knew quantum computing you would just write about it, poser.

[Anonymous No.16103432]

>>16103412
>If you knew quantum computing you would just write about it, poser.
The "I fucking love science" people are all like this. They don't know shit about fuck. They just repeat what the black mustache guy said on tv.

[Anonymous No.16103448]

>>16103144
I'm an incel and I'm raging and seething. What an absolute qt

[Anonymous No.16103740]

>>16103144
On loan from the IDF's pool of trafficked Ukrainian models.

[Anonymous No.16103788]

DNA storage?

https://youtu.be/laGXRs9Ce70

https://youtu.be/60Gi5lqL-dA
https://youtu.be/ZuB3yB7QWCk

[Anonymous No.16103802]

>>16103788
Currently a meme because read and write speeds are slow. Not relevant at all to this thread.

[Anonymous No.16103803]

>>16103102
Unironically no use case other than turning all computer security systems into swiss cheese. Destablizing technology.

[Anonymous No.16103815]

>>16103803
The other big use case is quantum chemistry. Being able to do quantum chemistry faster would fucking rock. Better computational quantum chemistry means we can develop new materials faster, new materials could enable sex bots, sexbots could suck your dick. Therefore, this tech could suck your dick

[Anonymous No.16103827]

>>16103412
Write what about it? You wouldn't understand shit. I don't waste my time explaining quantum computing to butthurt redditors.

[Anonymous No.16103931]

>>16103802
>quantum computers
>quantum internet
This data storage problem is going to be bigger than you think.

[Anonymous No.16103969]

>>16103931
>quantum bots posting replies in your threads that derail and do not derail your thread simultaneously

[Anonymous No.16103995]

>>16103969
Sage in all energy levels.

[Anonymous No.16104001]

>>16103969
I wish your IQ level would be the minimum requirement for posting here.

[Anonymous No.16104016]

>>16103293
>>16103353
Not an argument

[Anonymous No.16104182]

>>16103102
Quantum decoherence. Simple as.
>>16103262
>>16103286
>>16103312
Get lost you imbecile morons.

[Anonymous No.16104213]

>>16103253
>Walking while emailing
Do tech bros (and sis) really

[Anonymous No.16104380]

>>16103803
Cryptocurrency mining. Using quantum computers could theoretically enable every transaction made on Earth with crypto. Crypto mining at the moment uses a lot of energy and I don’t think we could sustainability do it with current tech.

[Anonymous No.16104395]

>>16103803
>unironically no use case other than this literal silver bullet against my nation's strategic opponents

Maybe the glowies do secretly possess working quantum computers

[Anonymous No.16104497]

>>16103102
I dont know but I got scammed.
Was a EECS major, switched to Physics major because I liked my QP and QC classes, I used to do cool shit with embedded systems, signal processing, some machine learning. Could have combined all of that to become a good roboticist.
I left for Physics because le quantum and I didn't know any better, 2 years in, about to graduate soon and I realize it's all so fucking obscure and meaningless.

Researchers will siphon taxpayers money to simulate a many-body systems, then 3 weeks later some HPC guys come out to say "hmmm actually we managed to do this classically".
Turns out most of the hard QC problems can be solved classically through clever statistical methods, and quantum cryptography is a meme because we already have quantum-proof encryption.
I regret following this path.

I just hope we're at a similar stage AI was a couple of decades ago, when nobody believed in it except academics, and the researchers then suddenly became super valuable and got offered jobs with crazy high TC as big techs where desperate to join the race.

[Anonymous No.16104624]

>>16103827
>don't waste my time explaining quan
Yet you are posting in this thread. Yoi dont know shit.
Explain what you ask, well explain how a quantum computer does a computation.
Any computation. Any logical operation at all, the simplest one, an addition, a XOR logic gate, anything at all.
Thats what you dont know
>>16104182
I wont, ill jusyt keep exposing you until you prove me wrong or get lost

[Anonymous No.16104626]

>>16104624
Simulating classical gates via quantum gates is like literally the first chapter of Nielsen's and Chuang's standard textbook on QC. Why should I bother spoonfeeding an aggressively larping reddit cretin like you? Read the text by yourself or fuck off.

[Anonymous No.16104632]

>>16104626
>Simulating classical gates via quantum gates is like literally the first chapter o
Write about it.
Literally explain how to do the simplest possible quantum computation. Doesnt have to be an algorithm or do anything useful. Stop responding if you think this is above you, if you do respond just write aboyt quantum computation.
If you were doing this IRL in public your behavior would be embarrassing to you, you write like a politician, changing the topic or insulting your opponents rather than answering the questions.

[Anonymous No.16104633]

>>16104626
>an aggressively larping reddit cretin like you?
But im not larping? Are you projecting now, and accusing me of what you do?
How am i larping? Im not pretending to be an expert on quantum computers, like you pretend.

[Anonymous No.16104637]

>>16104632
>>16104633
How much will you pay me for a lecture on basics of QC? I'm not a janny, i.e. I don't work for free.

[Anonymous No.16104638]

>>16103102
"quantum computing" is literally bruteforce

[Anonymous No.16104648]

>>16104637
Oh so now money is the issue? Wasnt it because i was dumb or a larper?
If you believe you are so above everyone not in your niche field, why are you posting in this thread?
As far as i can tell you are just a dumb larper that came to this thread to insult people. You have not written anything at all about quantum computing, beyond the odd buzzword here and there.
Unless you post your name and credentials, no one has any reason to believe you are who you pretend to be.

[Anonymous No.16104661]

>>16104648
>your niche field
Lmao, I'm not even working in QC. I just said I was knowledgeable about it. And if you weren't a cringe larper dimwit you'd know that there's nothing arcane about QC. It's easily accessible at the undergrad level to anyone who knows basics of QM and computation. You act like it's a mysterious and exclusive subject. Spoiler: It's not. Stop being an immature dipshit.

[Anonymous No.16104666]

>>16104661
Why do you keep writing about yourself? No one knows who you are or cares, not that anyone believes you, stupid larper. Go fuck yourself dumbass

[Anonymous No.16104668]

>>16104666
Are you butthurt because you asinine trolling attempt failed?

[Anonymous No.16104708]

>>16104380
no, that's wrong, quantum would render all current crypto-currency worthless, they are valuable because they are hard to attain, the "upside" is that given that there is quantum-proof encryption, which means that there will be quantum-proof crypto-currency as well

[Anonymous No.16104735]

>>16104708
Regardless, one thing is certain, you can’t do cryptocurrency currently for every transaction because it would pollute the fuck out of the Earth. Quantum computers can do it.

[Anonymous No.16104739]

>>16103102
>Why was quantum computing a flop?
It was actually a quflop

[Anonymous No.16104748]

>>16104735
Keep in mind that only a tiny percentage of people use it.

>It’s estimated that Bitcoin consumes electricity at an annualized rate of 127 terawatt-hours (TWh). That usage exceeds the entire annual electricity consumption of Norway.

[Anonymous No.16104755]

>>16104748
>These are the people who are anti-consoomers
>Yet they consoom this much energy
Makes a nibba think

[Anonymous No.16104779]

>>16104668
Failed?
failed how?
I started in this thread by explaining that no one in 4chan knows anything about quantum computing and i have only been proven right.

[Anonymous No.16104884]

>>16104779
>no one on 4chan knows X, prove me wrong by spoonfeeding me
Immature provocations like these have no place here, kid. Grow up.

[Anonymous No.16104893]

>>16104884
Asking a question is not asking to be spoonfed. You clearly dont know shit about anything, that is why you cant explain the simplest things about quantum computing. You are an impersonator and a fraud.
The worst part if you are trying to act aloof and like you are above everyone, yet you still post in 4chan and you will answer to this post. You will say you dont want to waste time, yet you will still post.
You will try not to post for a while, then you will still do.

[Anonymous No.16104898]

>>16104893
You never asked a question. "Summarize the first chapter of a textbook for me" is not a valid question, in particular not in combination with an insult. You are not a worthy conversational partner to talk to about QC. All you deserve is mockery until you learned your lesson.

[Anonymous No.16104907]

>You: An impolite person wants to trick others into explaining the basics of quantum computing to him. He does so by claiming "nobody here knows about quantum computing, prove me wrong!" Explain to him why his behavior is inappropriate and how he could ask for help instead.

>ChatGPT: His behavior is inappropriate because it's disrespectful and manipulative. Instead of genuinely seeking knowledge, he's trying to deceive others for his own amusement or ego boost.
>A more respectful approach would be to express genuine curiosity and ask for help directly, without making false claims or attempting to trick others. He could say something like, "I'm interested in learning about quantum computing but I don't know where to start. Can someone explain the basics to me?" This approach shows humility and a willingness to learn, rather than trying to belittle others for their knowledge or lack thereof.

[Anonymous No.16104931]

>>16104907
Appeal to AI fallacy

[Anonymous No.16104943]

>>16104898
>You never asked a question
I have been asking for many posts for you or for anyone else really, to explain how a quantum computer does any computation. The simples computation at all.

[Anonymous No.16104948]

>>16104898
>Summarize the first chapter of a textbook for me"
I didnt bring up a textbook, you did, and i never asked you to summarize a chapter of it. You keep making shit up, you are also unable to keep responding to me,
You are just a bitch to me, obeying my commands to answer to every one of my posts.
Bitch.

[Anonymous No.16104979]

>>16104931
Kek

[Anonymous No.16104983]

>>16104943
>>16104948
There's quite a few people here who know their shit when it comes to quantum computing. Yet nobody deems you worthy of spoonfeeding. Because you're giving everyone the ick. Perhaps try begging a little more and calling me daddy. Maybe then I'll show you some trivial quantum circuit you can find in any textbook.

[Anonymous No.16106195]

>>16103262
Behold! This is what it looks like when a Visual Basic programmer starts grunting about Physics.

[Anonymous No.16106210]

>>16103740
Women washing like money washing?

[Anonymous No.16106226]

>>16103102
Because it was simultaneously also a flip.

[Anonymous No.16106262]

>>16103102
>Why was quantum computing a flop?
I already explained this in another thread.

1. They arbitrarily limited quantum computing to the manipulation of binary observables. Choosing the qubit as a fundamental unit of computation was a mistake. The quantum world has a rich landscape of continuous observables yielding the potential for real variable computing, i.e. a candidate for hyperturing computation.

2. They disregard the role of consciousness in the measurement process. To them measurement is merely a technical building block at the end of their petty algorithms. Unlocking the power of consciousness and free will would revolutionize computing.

[Anonymous No.16106356]

>>16104931
Top kek!

[Anonymous No.16106358]

2 good ones.

[Anonymous No.16106408]

>>16103257
please simulate a femdom gf universe for me

[Anonymous No.16106711]

>>16103102
because copenhagen interpretation is COPE

qubits must be perfectly predictable for our theories to be correct

[Anonymous No.16106755]

Quantum Computers are not a flop but I understand why a lot of people think they are. Quantum computing isn't a Computer Science problem right now or really even a physics problem. It's an engineering one. We have quantum computers that are functional and have performed basic computation. However, in order to do the quantum stuff we want it too, we need way stronger super computers. Currently, the largest super computer has a little over 1000 physical qubits. However, it take roughly 1024 physical qubits to equal one logical qubit. And, the most popular quantum computing algorithm (Shor's algorithm) requires 2050 qubits to perform the algorithm on a 1024-bit number. So, we will need 2^21 physical qubits. So, we have less than 1% of the necessary qubits necessary. At this point, all the math checks out. Engineers just need to come up with clever ways to scale the size of quantum computers.

[Anonymous No.16108107]

>>16103102
its just a stupid concept not applicable anywhere outside of niche studies as of now

[Anonymous No.16108195]

>>16103102
Because it couldn't go over 1 FLOPS

[Anonymous No.16108260]

>>16103102
It was always a flop. It was hoped that novel algorithms could undermine the realities of complexity theory, especially NP-complete problems. Once it became clear that it wouldn't help everyone stopped caring.

[Anonymous No.16109026]

>>16103969
joke's on you. I make measurement with extreme prejudice.

[Anonymous No.16110420]

Quantum farts will be absolutely paradigm-shifting

In fact i'm going to rip one now, for science!

[Anonymous No.16110994]

>>16104497
unfortunately... at its core, AI is still roughly in the state it was just before the AI winter. nothing fundamentally has changed architecture-wise, people are still just using multilayer perceptrons. the only real differences are 1) the compute available is finally enough for larger multilayer perceptrons and 2) a particular problem (seq2seq) that has a lot of applications when generalized was shown to be trainable on multilayer perceptrons by using highly parallelized multilayer perceptrons (transformers), which made training all these models feasible with existing compute.

nobody has solutions for continuous (even segmented) learning, an actual model for emulating abstraction (which is the bare minimum for emulating 'understanding'), enough compute to run recurrent units at nearly the same scale as newer multilayer perceptrons (and you absolutely need recurrence of some sort to allow an AI to be 'aware' of anything), or a way to keep the gimmicky external "memory" that context windows represent from exploding compute requirements over time even for multilayer perceptrons (you literally feed as much of the whole interaction history as you can back in as a prompt under the hood; the longer the input, the greater the compute).

now, a lot of tasks can be automated with the limited, purely short-term memory allowed by a context window, but those tasks are all quite narrow in scope (i.e. the necessary memory actually fits in a context window). this means any such task would always be more efficiently automated by simpler, less generalized systems that don't require models of nearly the same scale as something like an LLM.

the promise of generalized task automation across a wide scope of tasks with giant multilayer perceptrons would be, even if it was true, hilariously inefficient from an energy/compute standpoint, but it is fundamentally a marketing lie. scale doesn't change architecture and doesn't do magic.

[Anonymous No.16110999]

>>16104638
i fucking love combinatoric time complexities

[Anonymous No.16111544]

>>16103144
>pull data into google cloud
bitch nigga this makes no sense.
also your code is for a flask/python rest api. how tf is this for "pulling into" google cloud

[Anonymous No.16111552]

>>16103144
Science ended the instant women were allowed in the room.

[Anonymous No.16111773]

Because Quantum entanglement is not real.

[Anonymous No.16112113]

>>16103377
Everything on the internet pre-2023 still uses encryption that is vulnerable and world govts downloaded everything so they could Crack it later

[Anonymous No.16112145]

>>16111544
>>16111552
why the misogyny? Do you feel threatened that a woman is more intelligent and successful than you basement dwelling incels are?

[Anonymous No.16113041]

>>16112145
No. I'm threatened by a system that has discarded merit as the measure of success and now rewards people simply having the correct gender.

[Anonymous No.16113151]

>>16103102
>Why was quantum computing a flop?

The general nature of how it works itself is the main reason why it's a "flop". It's too hyper specialized and thus can't function using normal "commercial" transistors in everyday computers due to quantum tunneling. So there's no immediate utility for it in the commercial sector anywhere.

Taking it further most CEOs and shareholders along with the general population doesn't even understand how the average transistor in a works in a semiconductor in relation to electrons moving through it. So what do you think is going to happen if you try to explain to them that Quantum Computers are designed in a way to resolve electrons behaving differently in terms of movement when dealing with smaller scale ecosystems?

[Anonymous No.16113153]

>>16103102
Nobody's making anything quantum for the consumer market other than the chinese

[Anonymous No.16113331]

>>16103102
Because you're impatient. It's the same shit as people saying fusion will never happen or AI will never happen.

[Anonymous No.16113391]

It faces a similar problem to analog computing. It can't be used for general purposes.

It will probably have commercial applications (as analog computing still does), but you're probably never gonna be playing Minecraft on a quantum computer.

[Anonymous No.16115226]

>>16103102
Because quantum computers are a fucken nonsense scam.

>IT can like go infinetly fast because it can calculate the results in all of the multiverses
This is literally nonsense.