Strilanc

12 ms·

151.
by Strilanc 4y ago
I think quantum computing is at the start of a notation transition, from using mainly quantum logic circuits to using mainly ZX graphs. It makes things that used to look different obviously the same, so you can easily translate results. A f
152.
by Strilanc 4y ago
This was also my reaction to the comment. Go play out this type of conversation with ChatGPT. Does it actually do worse at this than at writing the code? Or is "but code generators can't do the requirements part" just a cac
153.
by Strilanc 4y ago
That's only true if you focus purely on the cost as being polynomial or not. The constant factors, the exponents, and the ability to represent difficult problems compactly , can of course differ pretty substantially. The ability to fi
154.
by Strilanc 4y ago
> Are there any inherently stable/noise free/non-Volatile Quantum Computing methods, at all? No. With quantum computers, you'd be delighted to have physical qubits where all gate error rates stayed below 1 in a thousand
155.
by Strilanc 4y ago
If I wanted to factorize 21 without demonstrating any kind of quantum speedup, I'd use pen and paper.
156.
by Strilanc 4y ago
In the surface code the gates are all variations on idling. First you idle one way, then you idle another way for a bit, and the result is a gate. (The technical term is lattice surgery.) Because of that, it would be extremely surprising if
157.
by Strilanc 4y ago
This result is notably more open than most papers. The circuits executed and measurement data collected are available on Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/record/6804040 . You can do your own analysis of the claim.
158.
by Strilanc 4y ago
No, that's years in the future at least. Factoring 21 without any compilation tricks requires doing a modular exponentiation under superposition. The best known way to do that requires two registers of workspace (10 qubits), plus a tee
159.
by Strilanc 4y ago
I would speculate the main hurdle was probably believing the players in the first place . Humans are notoriously bad at not-noticing-patterns in properly random data. And statistical bugs like this require more effort and careful attention
160.
by Strilanc 4y ago
Based on reading other parts of the website, it advocates for assisted suicide more generally. In this context, voluntarily-not-eating-or-drinking's main benefit appears to be that you can't punish me or my family or my doctor fo
161.
by Strilanc 4y ago
This paper is claiming to make quantum factoring thousands of times cheaper than previously estimated (maybe even hundreds of thousands of times, depending on if error correction is needed). I think it's wrong, but if it was correct it
162.
by Strilanc 4y ago
First they destroyed the library of Alexandria. Now they want to destroy the library of Alexandra.
163.
by Strilanc 4y ago
"Plays into common misconceptions" is one of the worst properties that a video targeted at general audiences can have. This even happens if your video is technically correct but sounds sorta like the common misconception [1]. So
164.
by Strilanc 4y ago
Actually... it is! You can think of the barrier with two slits as a device that measures (a) whether the photon hit the barrier or missed barrier and additionally (b) when the photon hits the barrier, where did it hit the barrier. Notably,
165.
by Strilanc 4y ago
This video is very misleading. - It shows the single-slit case as a vertical band. Actually, the single slit case is also a smear[1][2]. A smear just a wide as the double slit pattern (but less rippled). Photons don't switch between mo
166.
by Strilanc 4y ago
Another use case where you should be seriously considering using post-quantum techniques is update verification. If a piece of hardware needs to work 10 years from now, and it uses RSA or ECC public key crypto to verify proposed software up
167.
by Strilanc 4y ago
For the Microsoft one I'm assuming you're referring to the retraction of the detection of Majoranas [1]. Do you have a reference for a Google quantum paper being retracted? I don't recall an instance of that (disclaimer: I am
168.
by Strilanc 4y ago
I agree that it makes sense for cryptographers to be jumpy around papers claiming improvements in quantum factoring, even if those papers are low quality and likely to be wrong. But that doesn't mean you stop calling the papers low qua
169.
by Strilanc 4y ago
If the paper is correct then yes, it would be a huge improvement in the required space even accounting for the overhead of error correction. Shor's algorithm requires performing a modular exponentiation under superposition. For an n bi
170.
by Strilanc 4y ago
I want to contrast this paper with Shor's factoring paper [1]. One of the things that stands out to me about Shor's paper is how meticulous he is. He is considering the various ways the algorithm might fail, and proving it doesn&#
171.
by Strilanc 4y ago
The amount of error correction you need is more than what the five qubit code provides. A more typical estimate is that you'd need 1000 physical qubits per logical qubit. For example, using the surface code, a back of the envelope esti
172.
by Strilanc 4y ago
> The use of SHA-1 in Git is not for security purposes It's for verifying data integrity, which is a cryptographic task (ie for security purposes). In Linus' Google tech talk on git he actually does say it's not a security
173.
by Strilanc 4y ago
You're referring to the machine generated paper (reference 3)? I checked and quillbot predates the paper (2017 vs 2019), so that's possible.
174.
by Strilanc 4y ago
This reminds me of a simpler situation [1]. I give you a coin, and promise it is biased, but don't tell you the bias. I flip the coin and ask you what is the probability that it landed heads. - A bayesian says the probability of the co
175.
by Strilanc 4y ago
I've also had some interesting interactions between the academic world and my blog. One time someone copy pasted a bunch of my blog posts, ran them through a thesaurus badly , and published the result in trash journals under their own
176.
by Strilanc 4y ago
I think one major difference is that flat earth-ism requires blatant worldwide conspiracies whereas young earth-ism could be compatible with mere worldwide incompetence. It's not so hard to accidentally screw up radiocarbon dating of a
177.
by Strilanc 4y ago
Given the history of false proofs of the four color theorem surviving scrutiny for decades, I think I'll wait for this to be verified by a computer proof language such as Lean before trusting it. (This is intended seriously, but I do l
178.
by Strilanc 4y ago
I'd be surprised if there was a computable density limit for the random plane, just because the system is Turing complete so the answer could easily end up being like Chaitin's contant where it depends on halting problems. For exa
179.
by Strilanc 4y ago
> you can use up all available memory in approx. 64 quick steps by: Type 1 character; Undo to beginning; Type 1 character; Undo to beginning; etc This is fine because "undo to beginning" isn't a single action. Each time
180.
by Strilanc 4y ago
Thanks for the reference. > Note that the probability of having some entanglement between your partial states goes up rather dramatically with the number of them that you have Entanglement is not binary, it is continuous. If you start

More ›