This is an interesting article but I think this is more about the marketing hype bullshit rather than the potential of quantum computing.
We are in very early days of quantum computing despite all the hyperbole from companies showing off their wares. Extrpolating from what we have now and saying “it’s not very good” is not surprising. The whole point of the research and development is to solve the problems with making a good quantum computer.
The theoretical device they’ve compared with is not the aim of quantum computing. Such a device may well be developed but it would be a stepping stone towards the eventual goal. Solving input and output limitations and the efficiency of error correcting qubits seems to be big focuses in research.
The eventual goal may not be reached or reachable, and this research paper has merit in highlighting the marketing nonsense. But I don’t think it follows that there is a fundamental problem with the economics or practicality of quantum computing - instead it highlights we are well away from the eventual goal and the current stepping stone tech being much real world use.
Basically just because one group is over hyping the tech it does not follow that we should rubbish it. It’s a bit like AI - the current technics massively overhyped but it does have some value, and the trajectory may lead to something better. Butninstead all that is happening is the marketing hype and pushing of early alpha tech is giving AI a bad reputation and a speculative bubble in the tech markets. One that will pop - but AI won’t go away, it’ll just change and continue being developed with less money thrown at it. Just as the Internet didn’t go away after the dotcom bubbles in 2000.
This is an interesting article but I think this is more about the marketing hype bullshit rather than the potential of quantum computing.
We are in very early days of quantum computing despite all the hyperbole from companies showing off their wares. Extrpolating from what we have now and saying “it’s not very good” is not surprising. The whole point of the research and development is to solve the problems with making a good quantum computer.
The theoretical device they’ve compared with is not the aim of quantum computing. Such a device may well be developed but it would be a stepping stone towards the eventual goal. Solving input and output limitations and the efficiency of error correcting qubits seems to be big focuses in research.
The eventual goal may not be reached or reachable, and this research paper has merit in highlighting the marketing nonsense. But I don’t think it follows that there is a fundamental problem with the economics or practicality of quantum computing - instead it highlights we are well away from the eventual goal and the current stepping stone tech being much real world use.
Basically just because one group is over hyping the tech it does not follow that we should rubbish it. It’s a bit like AI - the current technics massively overhyped but it does have some value, and the trajectory may lead to something better. Butninstead all that is happening is the marketing hype and pushing of early alpha tech is giving AI a bad reputation and a speculative bubble in the tech markets. One that will pop - but AI won’t go away, it’ll just change and continue being developed with less money thrown at it. Just as the Internet didn’t go away after the dotcom bubbles in 2000.