2 ms·
the difference between a QC and Theranos is you can't prove a quantum computer isn't actually working as advertised.
by noduerme 4y ago
the difference between a QC and Theranos is you can't prove a quantum computer isn't actually working as advertised.
- Barrin92 4y agoif I got a startup grant for every idea someone can't prove doesn't work I'd be the most well funded individual on the planet
- tsimionescu 4y agoShor you can: can it break RSA? If yes, QC. If not, not QC.
- noduerme 4y agoWhat if it's just able to break a particular RSA file after several billion attempts to keep it running long enough?
- sgt101 4y agoI was quite irritated by the debunking of Sycamore's result recently; I had the impression from the pr (and the paper) that they had obtained exact results, but the truth is that these results were approximate. That's totally different. Previously I had dug out of the papers that it takes 48hrs to boot the machine and that it can only run for a few hours... and that was disappointing enough. Also the obscuring of the impact of quantum fidelity on the Eagle chip from IBM. Ok, it's got 124 qbits - but you end up with a max circuit size of 24 which is similar to the previous 48 qbit generation (I think that one is called dodo or something). Anyway, it looks like the absolute best spin is put on everything and the actual problems are being ducked - probably because they have to be because they are way beyond the current SOA.