• @DarkCloud
      link
      11
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      She’s surprised by the plant (fair enough). Compared to the shit Trump says the dems are mild.

  • Mossy Feathers (She/They)
    link
    fedilink
    591 month ago

    Better than the reaction I probably would have had. I would have had to shove my hands in my pockets because I’d immediately have the urge to start touching it and looking closely at all the bits and pieces.

    • kamenLady.
      link
      201 month ago

      I always look for the detachable parts. I mean, it has to have detachable parts, right?

    • @jastyty
      link
      161 month ago

      Do you mean qubits and pieces?

  • @DaddleDew
    link
    401 month ago

    “worst chandelier I’ve ever seen”

      • magnetosphere
        link
        fedilink
        161 month ago

        I didn’t know quantum computers looked like 70’s sci-fi movie props. I’ve never seen one before. I looked it up, and I think you’re right.

        • @Valmond
          link
          91 month ago

          If they don’t do anything useful yet, you better make them look smashing to get that funding!

          I guess :-)

      • @10_0
        link
        -31 month ago

        Not enough wires imo

      • @dariusj18
        link
        521 month ago

        Quantum computing got us the Donald Biden superposition

      • @asbestos
        link
        English
        261 month ago

        indecisive as fuck

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -81 month ago

        Uhm… a lot? It is a field fueled with empty promises. While academia is falling apart, quantum computing allows some physicists not to starve. Once they both collapse, the trust and investments in physics collapse as well

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 month ago

            Like what exactly? Do you understand that science is self-referential? Nobody from the quantum computing world will confirm that they’re crooks and those physicists who claim that QC is a bubble are pronounced dorks.

            I don’t have sources, only arguments.

            1. They had an audacity to announce achieving quantum supremacy a few years ago. If you read this paper carefully, you’d see that the achievement is simulation of the quantum chip itself for 200 ms.
            2. Algorithms. Why the fuck one would need to crack a fucking security code? While a substantial progress in error correction has been achieved, 3 old main algorithms for real world use are still in favor: Schor, Grover and Quantum Fourier. And they are still not superior for AES256.
            3. Significant changes in roadmap have been announced from a proclaimed leader of quantum computing. They have expected 1000 operational qubits by 2025, but now they want to error correct on their 84 qubits scheme (that still stimulates itself). I hope that in this decade they could use quantum computers to prove that 161 = 7 x 23, but I’m in doubt.

            I’m not in anyway claiming that quantum computers should not be developed: they might have uses in material science and in metrology. I’m highlighting the predicament that we have here: if the expectations from QC were real, nobody would invest in it, but if the expectations are not real, the investments will experience a sudden drop which will stop the research for a while.