11101010001100

8 ms·

61.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
I think this is just a(nother) canary for many other markets in the US v China game of monopoly. One weird effect in all this is that US Tech may go on to be over valued (i.e., disconnect from fundamentals) for quite some time.
62.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
This is exactly what happens in chess... for instance trading into a known winning endgame.
63.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Speed can be learned though...chess for example.
64.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Yes, these sorts of posts strike me as rich people learning that being rich doesn't solve everyone else's problems. Better late than never.
65.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Not mutually exclusive.
66.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
I agree, but improving DFT is a much harder problem than running AI on crystal+property databases. The interesting question is why is it harder?
67.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
For those comparing school to prison, please confirm that you have experience with both.
68.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
The best thing for a student is to abandon dogma. The easiest thing for a teacher is to embrace it.
69.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
I have a friend who did something similar about 15 years ago. They are moving back to Canada this year.
70.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
For reference, Harper was PM in 2010.
71.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Spend time grokking new technologies. Draw your own conclusions.
72.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Nevermind all that we learned from teaching chess to a computer. Ya a total waste.
73.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
I guess I don't have an issue with being wrong if we treat 'measurement' like a black box.
74.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
I'm replying here since we appear to have reached the end. Presumably measurement involves interaction with 3 or more degrees of freedom (i.e., an entangled pair of qubits and a measurement device). This is something, for most types o
75.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
And is that solution required to be deterministic? If so, that is another postulate.
76.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Would you agree that measurement is considered an interaction?
77.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Technically measurement devices are described by wavefunctions too.
78.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Interaction in quantum physics is something that remains abstract at a certain level. So long as conservation principles are satisfied (include probability summing to one), interactions are permitted (i.e., what is permitted is required).
79.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Right, the point is that we don't need a solution to the 'measurement problem' to have a quantum computer.
80.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Isn't this just circling back to the original ontic vs epistemic though -> map vs territory?
81.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Right I did hijack the thread a bit, but for me, the distribution is more than enough. The rest is just interpretation.
82.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Sure, the 'problem' is that while the schrodinger equation is deterministic, we can only 'measure' the amplitudes of the solution. Is the wavefunction epistemic or ontological?
83.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
MRS is this week, you can go and join the conversations with people at the metal level. Probably even talk to the authors themselves!
84.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
The paper is more or less a dead end. If there is another name you want to call it, by all means.
85.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Their material discovery paper turned out to have negligible significance.
86.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
As I said prep is grinding.
87.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
I'm a prof. I grind when I prepare a lecture. It's part of the job.
88.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
It is humiliating to work for someone else. What else is new.
89.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Legal issues seem to attract plenty of attention on HN. We could see what sort of precedent has been set.
90.
by 11101010001100 2y ago
Do you play any games that require mathematical reasoning? You might realize you are using integration without calling it integration i.e. calculating expected values.

More ›