3 ms·

Agreed. Was expecting some kind of idea why information technology actually is a mega-trend and what possible game changers are around the corner. Just imagine

by noiv 15y ago

Agreed. Was expecting some kind of idea why information technology actually is a mega-trend and what possible game changers are around the corner. Just imagine only one patent on a working quantum computing device and all mentioned companies are out.

groby_b 15y ago
I'm not quite sure why e.g. Facebook would care about a working quantum computer, at least in the short run.
- dagobart_ 15y ago
  On the other hand, why would anybody assume, Facebook could ever have an interest in face recognition? But now they do.
- noiv 15y ago
  Looks like bashing Facebook leads to down votes, interesting. But short run is not 100 years. And yes, Facebook will care from day one about QC, think data center and investors willing to burn money to foster old school technology.
  - groby_b 15y ago
    As far as I know (and I haven't read too much about QC, so I might very well be totally off), QCs are only useful for a very specific set of problems. And none of those seem to map to FB problems right now. Will that change? Sure. Will FB do internal research with QCs? Maybe, once they've progressed past the vaporware state. (Sidenote - if we observe QC less, will development work better? ;) But a working QC will not put FB out of business any time soon. The hardware is only a tiny piece of the puzzle of quantum computing. Algorithms for QC are rare, hard to develop, and the field is in its absolute infancy.
    - noiv 15y ago
      "The hardware is only a tiny piece of the puzzle of quantum computing. Algorithms for QC are rare, hard to develop, and the field is in its absolute infancy." Is that the description of computer technology as of 1911?
      - groby_b 15y ago
        More ca. 1930 - precursors of the Church-Turing thesis showing up. And if anybody then had predicted that "one patent on computers, and IBM is out of business", they would've been wrong too.

by noiv 15y ago

groby_b 15y ago

I'm not quite sure why e.g. Facebook would care about a working quantum computer, at least in the short run.

dagobart_ 15y ago
On the other hand, why would anybody assume, Facebook could ever have an interest in face recognition? But now they do.
noiv 15y ago
Looks like bashing Facebook leads to down votes, interesting. But short run is not 100 years. And yes, Facebook will care from day one about QC, think data center and investors willing to burn money to foster old school technology.
- groby_b 15y ago
  As far as I know (and I haven't read too much about QC, so I might very well be totally off), QCs are only useful for a very specific set of problems. And none of those seem to map to FB problems right now. Will that change? Sure. Will FB do internal research with QCs? Maybe, once they've progressed past the vaporware state. (Sidenote - if we observe QC less, will development work better? ;) But a working QC will not put FB out of business any time soon. The hardware is only a tiny piece of the puzzle of quantum computing. Algorithms for QC are rare, hard to develop, and the field is in its absolute infancy.
  - noiv 15y ago
    "The hardware is only a tiny piece of the puzzle of quantum computing. Algorithms for QC are rare, hard to develop, and the field is in its absolute infancy." Is that the description of computer technology as of 1911?
    - groby_b 15y ago
      More ca. 1930 - precursors of the Church-Turing thesis showing up. And if anybody then had predicted that "one patent on computers, and IBM is out of business", they would've been wrong too.