3 ms·
Why do more people need to be interested? Why do we need to ensure access to quantum computers to programmers? Seriously, any programmer can fire up a quantum
by reikonomusha 5y ago
Why do more people need to be interested?
Why do we need to ensure access to quantum computers to programmers?
Seriously, any programmer can fire up a quantum simulator for any number of the quantum instruction languages and be more productive than with a real quantum computer.
Because of the hype, we’ve all been led to believe that we are “ready” to program quantum machines and we just need to train more people through boot camps, hackathons, and summer schools. It’s simply not true.
The quantum computers of today are programmable (barely), and the programs do run (though you can only run a dozen or so “statements” before you get junk results), but they’re so wildly bad compared to what you’d expect out of a textbook that you easily conclude “the scientists have work to do”.
Scientists do have more work to do, but it seems like every month there’s a perfectly respected scientist who gets a $15MM series A and starts spouting the same misinforming junk that quantum computing is going to help FedEx with logistics, or steel mills with operations planning. Then they hire a bunch of good academic people, pay them software-engineer salaries, and string them along to help them perpetuate the fundraising machine—not by actually doing science of course—hoping to also have a quantum computer/software/applications/algorithms be built as a by-product.
Money is very attractive to people, especially physicists who frequently find themselves jumping ship for an alternative, higher-paying career. There must be around 100 quantum companies now, most of them startups, and—to my knowledge—zero of them providing anything demonstrated to be a valuable commercial product. Some of them are definitely doing good work here and there, but in the bigger picture, the profit motive—whether shareholder value or venture capital returns—consistently undermines their ability to do research.
- smoldesu 5y agoSo with all that being said, your solutions is to ostracise more people? That checks out.
- reikonomusha 5y agoI didn’t propose a solution. But right now, as it stands, money is motivating the perpetuation of misinformation. I’m OK with that ending.
- mcguire 5y agoWho is ostracizing anyone? The only solution I see suggested is to take a quick look at the teeth of the horse you are being sold.
- iamstupidsimple 5y agoQC represents a fresh start for computer scientists to make their mark, much like machine learning was the past decade.
- reikonomusha 5y agoComputer scientists had QC to “make their mark” for the past 30 years, and will continue to have it for the next 30. It’s available irrespective of an industry full of cash-grabbing and misleading marketing.
- mcguire 5y agoWhy do they need a fresh start? Has the hype machine for machine learning started to come apart?