4 ms·

I respectfully disagree with your disapproval of my comment here, I agree that my opinion is quite strong but I don't think it is offensive. Given that Quantum

I respectfully disagree with your disapproval of my comment here, I agree that my opinion is quite strong but I don't think it is offensive. Given that Quantum Computing has yet to deliver on its promise after decades of work and huge investment, I think it is safe to compare the field to other fringe science that once occupied some of the best minds on the planet (like Newton and his obsession with Alchemy).

ThePhysicist 5y ago
Quantum computing isn't fringe science and almost no one in the physics community questions the validity of the underlying theories. It is a large engineering challenge so it's unclear whether a working large-scale quantum computer will be realized anytime soon, but that doesn't make it fringe science.
v37p 5y ago
Serious question for you. Have you read any recent papers? Some quantum computing applications have outperformed classical computers already[0] and will get better with more qubits and less noise. This stuff is in its infancy and making small baby steps. The phone in your pocket didn't get here without punch card programming or computers the size of rooms. This is that and you're around to witness it. Have some patience! [0] http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02860 http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02860
dilawar 5y ago
I share the sentiment that quantum computer folks hasn't delivered but I dont feel its a fringe science. Its just hard to deal with noise at that level. To me, string theory feels like a fringe science; and irritating one at best.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dang 5y ago
It's not that it was offensive, it's that it was too generic to be interesting. The problem with generic comments (like, e.g., "quantum computing is fringe science") is that they don't contain any specific information—they just make grand, empty claims. These nearly always cause discussion to go in a further generic direction (e.g. "no it isn't", "yes it is"). This is basically the arrow of entropy applied to forum threads. There's another aspect too: the more generic comments are, the more predictable they are. Since they don't contain much actual information, there's nothing really new to say, which means people repeat the same things over and over. Often they get angry as they do it, since indignation usually fills the vacuum when curiosity is absent. All of this is the opposite of what we're looking for on HN. What we want: specific, unpredictable, curiosity-gratifying conversation. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=generic%20discussion%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=diffs%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

ThePhysicist 5y ago

Quantum computing isn't fringe science and almost no one in the physics community questions the validity of the underlying theories. It is a large engineering challenge so it's unclear whether a working large-scale quantum computer will be realized anytime soon, but that doesn't make it fringe science.

v37p 5y ago

Serious question for you. Have you read any recent papers? Some quantum computing applications have outperformed classical computers already[0] and will get better with more qubits and less noise. This stuff is in its infancy and making small baby steps. The phone in your pocket didn't get here without punch card programming or computers the size of rooms. This is that and you're around to witness it. Have some patience! [0] http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02860 http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02860

dilawar 5y ago

I share the sentiment that quantum computer folks hasn't delivered but I dont feel its a fringe science. Its just hard to deal with noise at that level. To me, string theory feels like a fringe science; and irritating one at best.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dang 5y ago

It's not that it was offensive, it's that it was too generic to be interesting. The problem with generic comments (like, e.g., "quantum computing is fringe science") is that they don't contain any specific information—they just make grand, empty claims. These nearly always cause discussion to go in a further generic direction (e.g. "no it isn't", "yes it is"). This is basically the arrow of entropy applied to forum threads. There's another aspect too: the more generic comments are, the more predictable they are. Since they don't contain much actual information, there's nothing really new to say, which means people repeat the same things over and over. Often they get angry as they do it, since indignation usually fills the vacuum when curiosity is absent. All of this is the opposite of what we're looking for on HN. What we want: specific, unpredictable, curiosity-gratifying conversation. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=generic%20discussion%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=diffs%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html