IBM Quantum Computing

juan juan.g71 at gmail.com
Fri May 6 14:40:39 PDT 2016


On Fri, 6 May 2016 13:48:00 -0700
Sean Lynch <seanl at literati.org> wrote:

> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 12:27 PM, juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >         related
> >
> >         http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1400
> >
> >         http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2448
> 
> 
> These are both about D-Wave's machines, which are not universal
> quantum computers. IBM's is universal, 

	Yes, that's why I said "related" =P 

	What I found interesting about the d-wave 'affair' is that they
	can't even prove that the machines are using some kind of
	quantum effect. I'd expect the masters of the universe to be a 
	bit less sloppy in scientific matters. 

> though it's only 5 qubits, not
> even as many qubits as they used to factor the number 15. Still, I
> think there's plenty of reason to be skeptical of QC, and even if
> you're not that skeptical of it, we've still got decades before it'll
> be cracking even 1024 bit RSA.


	I just learned about "topological qbits" - they seem even less
	practical than ibm's stuff, at least for the time being... 






More information about the cypherpunks mailing list