2 ms·

No we don't. There exists no physical working quantum computer today. There never has been a working physical quantum computer. There exists a "theoretical mode

No we don't. There exists no physical working quantum computer today. There never has been a working physical quantum computer. There exists a "theoretical model that is simulated on classical computers" which is not a physical working quantum computer. https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2019/01/15/quantum-computing-as-a-field-is-obvious-bullshit/ https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2019/01/15/quantum-comput... I wish it weren't vaporware, truly.

bowsamic 4y ago
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04725-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04725-x > Quantum computational advantage with a programmable photonic processor There is a programmable photonic computer that has an advantage over classical computers
- pyinstallwoes 4y ago
  Oh, where can I buy one? See it in use at least, physically?
nl 4y ago
I read this post when it came out, nodded to myself and assumed it was correct because there seemed to have been no progress in quantum computing in my lifetime. Turns out he is wrong: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03213-z https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03213-z I'd invite you to read the blog of that other HN favorite (Scott Aaronson) on the topic: For me, though, the broader point is that neither party here—certainly not IBM—denies that the top-supercomputers-on-the-planet-level difficulty of classically simulating Google’s 53-qubit programmable chip really is coming from the exponential character of the quantum states in that chip, and nothing else. https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=4372 https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=4372 And later when Jianwei Pan and Chao-Yang Lu, got BosonSampling working on a quantum computer: While directly verifying the results of n-photon BosonSampling takes ~2n time for any known classical algorithm, I said, surely it should be possible with existing computers to go up to n=40 or n=50? A couple weeks later, the authors responded, saying that they’d now verified their results up to n=40, but it burned $400,000 worth of supercomputer time so they decided to stop there. This was by far the most expensive referee report I ever wrote! https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=5122 https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=5122

bowsamic 4y ago

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04725-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04725-x > Quantum computational advantage with a programmable photonic processor There is a programmable photonic computer that has an advantage over classical computers

pyinstallwoes 4y ago
Oh, where can I buy one? See it in use at least, physically?

nl 4y ago

I read this post when it came out, nodded to myself and assumed it was correct because there seemed to have been no progress in quantum computing in my lifetime. Turns out he is wrong: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03213-z https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03213-z I'd invite you to read the blog of that other HN favorite (Scott Aaronson) on the topic: For me, though, the broader point is that neither party here—certainly not IBM—denies that the top-supercomputers-on-the-planet-level difficulty of classically simulating Google’s 53-qubit programmable chip really is coming from the exponential character of the quantum states in that chip, and nothing else. https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=4372 https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=4372 And later when Jianwei Pan and Chao-Yang Lu, got BosonSampling working on a quantum computer: While directly verifying the results of n-photon BosonSampling takes ~2n time for any known classical algorithm, I said, surely it should be possible with existing computers to go up to n=40 or n=50? A couple weeks later, the authors responded, saying that they’d now verified their results up to n=40, but it burned $400,000 worth of supercomputer time so they decided to stop there. This was by far the most expensive referee report I ever wrote! https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=5122 https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=5122