5 ms·

Their previous offerings have been 2 physical quantum computers that can be accessed over the cloud. One with 5 qubits, and another with 16 qubits[0]. These com

Their previous offerings have been 2 physical quantum computers that can be accessed over the cloud. One with 5 qubits, and another with 16 qubits[0]. These computers have had thousands of users who have run millions of quantum algorithms [1]. [0]: https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/52403.wss https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/52403.wss [1]:https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/10/ibm-50-qubit-quantum-computer/ https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/10/ibm-50-qubit-quantum-com...

Xeoncross 9y ago
Wait, I didn't think we had actual quantum computers yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing
- joe_the_user 9y ago
  From your link: "A small 16-qubit quantum computer exists and is available for hobbyists to experiment with via the IBM quantum experience project."
  - Xeoncross 9y ago
    From the link in that sentence: "The IBM Quantum Experience (QX) enables anyone to ... ... explore tutorials and simulations around what might be possible with quantum computing."
    - joe_the_user 9y ago
      That sentences doesn't say the small 5 and 16 bit computers don't exist. Edit: if you read the whole link, the key description is: "IBM’s quantum processor is made up of superconducting transmon qubits, located in a dilution refrigerator at the IBM Research headquarters at the Thomas J. Watson Research Center. Users interact with the quantum processor through the quantum circuit model of computation, applying quantum gates on the qubits using a GUI called the quantum composer, writing quantum assembly language code[1] or through a Python API.[2]" Which is to say you have both a quantum computer and a simulator in IBM schema (which in the cloud 'cause you can't have supercooled chips in your basement), which is as one would expect running "real" quantum computing is going to be more expensive and uncertain now despite the hope it will give vast speed later.
- GreenOceanBlue 9y ago
  We don't.
  - pault 9y ago
    These types of replies aren't helpful. If you disagree with the claim please provide some specific reasons why.
- vtomole 9y ago
  We've had quantum computers since the 90's. We just haven't had "useful" quantum computers yet [0]. An implementation of quantum computers that is currently flourishing is one that is built out of superconducting circuits. This makes it easier to scale the quantum computer because you can leverage existing nanoelectronic fabrication techniques [1]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_quantum_computing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_quantum_computing [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_quantum_computing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_quantum_comput...
  - Xeoncross 9y ago
    > "We've had quantum computers since the 90's". It wasn't until 2005 we had the first (probable) qubyte created at the University of Innsbruck in Austria.
    - kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
      You don't need bytes to do computation.
      - colejohnson66 9y ago
        Wouldn't a qubyte be 8 qubits?
        mtgx 9y ago
        The term doesn't make sense because you're not going to use groups of 8 qubits to represent characters on a screen. We may actually need a new word for 2 qubits (dual-qubits? dubits?) because it seems 2 qubits are enough to break 1-bit of encryption, and I think I've read it's enough to simulate 1 atom, too.
        colejohnson66 9y ago
        I thought it was x qubits is equal to 2^x classical bits? So wouldn’t 2 “dubits” actually be four times (not twice as) better?

Xeoncross 9y ago

Wait, I didn't think we had actual quantum computers yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing

joe_the_user 9y ago
From your link: "A small 16-qubit quantum computer exists and is available for hobbyists to experiment with via the IBM quantum experience project."
- Xeoncross 9y ago
  From the link in that sentence: "The IBM Quantum Experience (QX) enables anyone to ... ... explore tutorials and simulations around what might be possible with quantum computing."
  - joe_the_user 9y ago
    That sentences doesn't say the small 5 and 16 bit computers don't exist. Edit: if you read the whole link, the key description is: "IBM’s quantum processor is made up of superconducting transmon qubits, located in a dilution refrigerator at the IBM Research headquarters at the Thomas J. Watson Research Center. Users interact with the quantum processor through the quantum circuit model of computation, applying quantum gates on the qubits using a GUI called the quantum composer, writing quantum assembly language code[1] or through a Python API.[2]" Which is to say you have both a quantum computer and a simulator in IBM schema (which in the cloud 'cause you can't have supercooled chips in your basement), which is as one would expect running "real" quantum computing is going to be more expensive and uncertain now despite the hope it will give vast speed later.
GreenOceanBlue 9y ago
We don't.
- pault 9y ago
  These types of replies aren't helpful. If you disagree with the claim please provide some specific reasons why.
vtomole 9y ago
We've had quantum computers since the 90's. We just haven't had "useful" quantum computers yet [0]. An implementation of quantum computers that is currently flourishing is one that is built out of superconducting circuits. This makes it easier to scale the quantum computer because you can leverage existing nanoelectronic fabrication techniques [1]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_quantum_computing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_quantum_computing [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_quantum_computing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_quantum_comput...
- Xeoncross 9y ago
  > "We've had quantum computers since the 90's". It wasn't until 2005 we had the first (probable) qubyte created at the University of Innsbruck in Austria.
  - kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
    You don't need bytes to do computation.
    - colejohnson66 9y ago
      Wouldn't a qubyte be 8 qubits?
      - mtgx 9y ago
        The term doesn't make sense because you're not going to use groups of 8 qubits to represent characters on a screen. We may actually need a new word for 2 qubits (dual-qubits? dubits?) because it seems 2 qubits are enough to break 1-bit of encryption, and I think I've read it's enough to simulate 1 atom, too.
        colejohnson66 9y ago
        I thought it was x qubits is equal to 2^x classical bits? So wouldn’t 2 “dubits” actually be four times (not twice as) better?