Why Google's Quantum Victory Is a Huge Deal—and a Letdown
On 9/28/19, jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
https://www.wired.com/story/why-googles-quantum-computing-victory-is-a-huge-...
Failure or not, quantum is likely to be one of those fast developments that catches everyone with their pants down. And what RFC or other model efforts are being made so that PQC can be even ready to drop in at that point...
Quantum DNA walk...
Maybe is some vibrations dance like HODL walk... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eu003Iqj4Y Better cook up some cryptocandy before IBM's quantum squad slaughters you like noobs...
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 01:09:30 -0400 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/28/19, jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
https://www.wired.com/story/why-googles-quantum-computing-victory-is-a-huge-...
Failure or not, quantum is likely to be one of those fast developments that catches everyone with their pants down.
the only motivation for that quantum garbage is to break all the traffic the NSA has stored nad 'archived'.
On 2019-09-29 07:25, jim bell wrote:
https://www.wired.com/story/why-googles-quantum-computing-victory-is-a-huge-...
Fifty four qbits is a a not quite seven qbyte computer. Interesting applications become possible when you have two hundred and fifty six qbytes. But fifty four qbits is one hell of a lot bigger than past quantum computers. It is definitely a big step in the direction of a two hundred and fifty six qubyte computer. The interesting question is how does this technology scale to reasonably sized quantum computers. And the answer is, it does not. To get a reasonable sized quantum computer you are going to need quantum error correction, with gigabyes of imperfect qbits representing a much smaller number of quantum error corrected qbits. It is difficult wrap one's mind around the necessary design, which resists human intuition - hard to think about the scaling factors that come into play
participants (4)
-
grarpamp -
jamesd＠echeque.com -
jim bell -
Punk