Are they actually a hoax to scam universities/companies out of research bux? If not, how come we STILL have nothing close to a useful quantum computer that will le break all cryptography?
Quantum computers
Are they actually a hoax to scam universities/companies out of research bux? If not, how come we STILL have nothing close to a useful quantum computer that will le break all cryptography?
>if a piece of technology doesn't progress as fast as my completely personal expectations then it must be fake or a scam or something
but quantum computers have been "2 more years!!" for the past 10 years
>I get my information from tabloid headlines instead of primary publication
It's not looking good pal, you still have time to delete the thread
>only supposed quantum computer is limited to 20 qubits and requires cryogenic cooling in a giant vacuum chamber
>its estimated that you need 13 million qubits to break RSA in a day
yeah nothing is breaking anytime soon lol, if ever
>dude remember how we went from the ENIAC to the iPhone in 10 years!?
The first demonstrated quantum computer using 2 qubits already dates from 1998. Thats already 26 years of nothing actually useful coming out of quantum computing, except for promises. So don't you dare to compare this to ENIAC, that was already useful from day 1.
Is this real? Zuck's metaverse had more to show for itself than this. I am now even more convinced it's a meme.
Here you go, quantumquck. Straight from the Nature article. The sooner you simply accept that you bet on the wrong horse, the sooner you can start the long, lonely road back from total moronation.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01965-3
>nature paywalled blog post = official statement/research paper from IBM
LMAO
Unlike you I read this article and it says nothing about "2 more years" and it's very balanced in its predictions
>Trust me bro
Yeah, I'll get right on that. In the meantime, you keep biting your nails watching the snail's pace progress of your precious memeputers.
I'm not the one posting nature blog posts that you clearly don't even have access to lmao
No, you're the one having a stroke over the fact that not everyone is creaming themselves over this nothingburger.
Yes, I am having a stroke. Any more things you like to believe?
Well, since you asked.
It's real yeah. There is a big difference between physical qubits, and logical qubits. I think IBM has chip out there with something like 400 physical qubits, but to create even a single logical qubit you would need anywhere between 100-10.000 physical qubits. Even if you apply Moore's law to quantum computing for some reason, we would be 100+ years away from having anything "breaking".
>2 more years
name 1 person working on them that has said this
no /misc/ and /x/ schizos dont count
Yeah
IBM
Quantum computing is a joke that spiraled out of control. It's nothing more than a random number generator, and everyone involved seems too deep in to admit it's all been a joke. Imagine being in charge of a department that's blown through millions, all while knowing the folks footing the bill have no clue. Surprisingly, we've still stumbled upon some pretty cool scientific discoveries, even though the whole field feels like a sham. Honestly, it's impressive how people manage to keep a straight face when they update us on their progress.
yes
quantumqucks are at it again
>posts tabloid trash instead of claims coming from primary sources
LMAOOOOO
https://www.reuters.com/technology/ibm-says-quantum-chip-could-beat-standard-chips-two-years-2021-11-15/
Good luck debunking Reuters, chud
>outperform classical computers
>at some tasks
Damn homie can't even get past the headline
My university released a WHOLE ASS MAJOR for them. I was actually thinking of enrolling
Your university is trying to get more student loan tuition bux from idiots.
My university is free as we're in Europe
Your university receives government funding based on enrollment numbers, so it still applies.
ARM chips are way more interesting and promising than quantum computing.
Yes, they generate so much "noise" (false positives) that they are basically unusable. They keep the scam going to by saying they will reduce the noise eventually.
>create random number generator
>call the number
>if you're correct, ask for another million bux for further research
>if you're wrong, call it noise and ask for another million bux for further research
I think you're right. This is pretty much it.
If there's a israelite, a poo or a chew behind it, it's a scam
>Are they actually a hoax to scam universities/companies out of research bux?
Spot On