3 ms·

[1] Contains no explanation about how Aaronson is 100% wrong. It is pure FUD. He won't actually argue points because that would allow Aaronson to rebut his rebu

[1] Contains no explanation about how Aaronson is 100% wrong. It is pure FUD. He won't actually argue points because that would allow Aaronson to rebut his rebuttal. [2] has little information, and no numbers, or comparisons to other techniques. All it says is "Quantum Computing is Cool! And we're working on NP hard problems." It does say that they have a quantum computer from Dwave, but they make no claims as to it's actual power. Adding emphasis to the main objectives from [2] "to study how quantum computing might advance machine learning." They're still researching things. [1] is a clear attempt to leverage the respectability of Google without actually addressing Aaronson's points.

mbq 13y ago
Also the funny part is that there are many nice ML algos that do not need harsh optimisations or even do not need optimisation at all (see random ferns for instance). Thus it might be hype for hype.
nextbigfuture9 13y ago
How was Aaronson was 100% wrong before - http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/05/aaronson-intuition-about-what-dwave.html http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/05/aaronson-intuition-about-wh... http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=306 http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=306 "Even if D-Wave managed to build (say) a coherent 1,024-qubit machine satisfying all of its design specs, it’s not obvious it would outperform a classical computer on any problem of practical interest. This is true both because of the inherent limitations of the adiabatic algorithm, and because of specific concerns about the Ising spin graph problem. On the other hand, it’s also not obvious that such a machine wouldn’t outperform a classical computer on some practical problems. The experiment would be an interesting one! Of course, this uncertainty — combined with the more immediate uncertainties about whether D-Wave can build such a machine at all, and indeed, about whether they can even produce two-qubit entanglement — also means that any talk of “lining up customers” is comically premature." * Dwave built the machines * Aaronson concedes that Dwave has achieved entanglement with a quantum annealing system for its full 512 qubits. * there were two big sales (Lockheed, Google) My own prediction from 2006 http://longbets.org/266/ http://longbets.org/266/ There will be a quantum computer with over 100 qubits of processing capability sold either as a hardware system or whose use is made available as a commercial service by Dec 31, 2010. 128 qubit system was sold in 2010. Quantum entangled annealing is proven in the USC paper of the 128 qubit system that was sold.

mbq 13y ago

Also the funny part is that there are many nice ML algos that do not need harsh optimisations or even do not need optimisation at all (see random ferns for instance). Thus it might be hype for hype.

nextbigfuture9 13y ago

How was Aaronson was 100% wrong before - http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/05/aaronson-intuition-about-what-dwave.html http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/05/aaronson-intuition-about-wh... http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=306 http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=306 "Even if D-Wave managed to build (say) a coherent 1,024-qubit machine satisfying all of its design specs, it’s not obvious it would outperform a classical computer on any problem of practical interest. This is true both because of the inherent limitations of the adiabatic algorithm, and because of specific concerns about the Ising spin graph problem. On the other hand, it’s also not obvious that such a machine wouldn’t outperform a classical computer on some practical problems. The experiment would be an interesting one! Of course, this uncertainty — combined with the more immediate uncertainties about whether D-Wave can build such a machine at all, and indeed, about whether they can even produce two-qubit entanglement — also means that any talk of “lining up customers” is comically premature." * Dwave built the machines * Aaronson concedes that Dwave has achieved entanglement with a quantum annealing system for its full 512 qubits. * there were two big sales (Lockheed, Google) My own prediction from 2006 http://longbets.org/266/ http://longbets.org/266/ There will be a quantum computer with over 100 qubits of processing capability sold either as a hardware system or whose use is made available as a commercial service by Dec 31, 2010. 128 qubit system was sold in 2010. Quantum entangled annealing is proven in the USC paper of the 128 qubit system that was sold.