This explanation, like every one I have read or watched, really doesn't explain how QCs will work. It talks about qbits, entanglement, and such, but how do these things contribute to a computed answer? This is like explaining a classical computer by saying it consists of binary digits and then stopping the explanation right there. I don't care how may qbits some experimental computer has. Tell me HOW it uses those qbits to do useful computation. Are there quantum logic gates for instance? Haven't heard any QC explanation tackle that question.
Apparently they can't do useful computations, and are very error prone. My question is like yours, and I want to know IF any QC even works, even a little bit? Is there a working QC? If there was, it would imply the many worlds theory is a universal fact. That would change the way we understand the world and the nature of the universe. Quantum computers will likely never achieve anything useful, in my opinion, because I think our understanding of quantum mechanics is severely flawed. But, if QCs manage to work, then, that means superposition really is possible, and the "magic" would become a real science. It's interesting to see how this idea is being explored, yet I have little faith in the QC's ability to achieve any problem-solving whatsoever.
@@Cicada3773 Quantum mechanics is actually the best tested framework in all of physics. It has no more flaws than any other scientific models: point being, it is incomplete (mostly with respect to gravity). That modeling of it can be difficult, but it is extremely solid. Not sure of your 'superposition/possible" words. I suspect you do not understand the term. Superposition is a very real phenomena that long predates any applications in computing. See anything by Dirac, Feynman, etc...Yes, of course, QCs are error prone. Welcome to computing. Error correction and fault tolerance are critical developmental segments in QC (entangling atoms, ions, photons is tricky) - but classical computing and IC logic have always wrestled with the same challenges - only now on a smaller scale. The end computation still occurs on a chip, btw. Classical computing has had a generation of scale and ample years of commercialization to work it out. Early classical computers could not much either. Quantum computers can certainly do computations (you can build quantum algorithms on IBM's platform in their public cloud right now) - but the real age of QC will come when they scale them to do things classical computers cannot. Likely in 5+ years. (~ a physicist with a degree in quantum mechanics)
Yes - there are quantum logic (Boolean, for example) gates that are used to abstract quantum circuit logic that are composed into focused quantum algorithms. The quantum algorithms are built for certain general computational tasks (not much difference than, say, how certain neural networks in machine/deep learning are better at some tasks vs others). There are countless videos on YT on your questions.
@@jonesyjones8026 I completely believe that there is a God, and in the light of experience in quantum physics, I know that there is a God who is almighty, He breaks all the laws of physics. This year's Nobel Prize was awarded to physicists who proved that the world is ruled by chance. And we know that there are no coincidences, it is only God's will. I greet you cordially with God.
I must disagree with other commenters. This video does not “decode” a darn thing. For instance, how does one arrange the connected qubits for different algorithms? How are initial conditions determined and set? Hows does the algorithm recognize being done? Or how about a real problem that DOESN’T use Shor’s algorithm, like finding roots for a complex polynomial? Or address the mundane, like what does the “code” look like? I would call this video Fluff With Facts.
This is severely underrated channel I've ever seen with the greatest potential........ That could be solvable with some great creative thumbnails tho..... I think....
Same here. Even if you tell it the answer, how do you know when the answer is achieved if the only way to collapse the system is observe it? Also, iiuc, “good” encryption algorithms (since breaking encryption is often cited as a quantum use case), even when you get the keys right, you aren’t presented with a light bulb that says “unlocked!”… you just get indecipherable garbage on the other side, which again suggest you have to know what is in it already. I might have that wrong, but still…. Don’t understand 😢
I think I'm with Einstein on this one. I'm just not seeing the use of outputting a completely non-deterministic state and applying a constructed state to resolve for an unknown state? It seems like you need to know how to influence the non-deterministic state to get a possible answer, which I feel like in many ways would be the answer itself (maybe its easier?). unless it's useful in some other way I'm not seeing (probably).
I understand it and at the same time I don't; however, there is a greater probability I will; providing I re-watch it, and rethink my position on how Quantum Computers work.
I don't understand how a quantum computer works... But I do hear many people who supposedly do understand quantum mechanics complain about how quantum computers "do not try all answers at the same time" and "that is not how quantum computers work".
why cant i find an actual explanation of how a Qantum computer calculates things? like a normal computer is a complex sequence of diodes,makes sence. like Wat a basic adder wold look like in a quantum computer?
Good interference through electromagnetic pulses may increase the probability of desired answer as superposition can generate many things . Decoherence is main issue here that is making qubits dance in a desired way😂 through our own music😂.
We don't know (yet). It's not even clear what "looking at" means. It might be when a conscious being makes an observation, or it might be something less mystical-sounding that that. But what *is* clear is that whatever the underlying mechanism, "normal" behavior down at those tiny sizes does not appear to be the same as it does in our everyday macro world.
ok this is information as how quantum tech works, but what exactly can it do.. faster.. as in what programming?, coding.. all of the gadgets function ability? what exactly it helps in ?
I figured error noise occurs because the suns radiation, maybe if you encased the computer in a cold and thick lead case the quibits would stay active to perform properly
With the best will in the world I still took nothing away from this video. Like many QC "explanation" videos there is no explanation of working. Only hype about what it could enable. If you strip away the waffle you get "Quantum computers work by using qbits in a clever way" .. and?
This video is misleading, it's about how a quantum computer should work. There's nothing in it about how they are preforming any computation at all, just that wave functions collapse giving magical answers. How disappointing. If you read this before the video, don't bother.
20 qubits have 2^20 base vectors. The total number of states is every possible superposition of those base vectors, which is exponentially more than the number of state vectors themselves.
Once.you measure, you get the one frame.thatnyou care about. 🤔 I would imagine it is a useless problem. You can only take advantage of problems that require massive parallelization.
Scientific American was once about Science, but nowadays, it’s an embarassment beyond of what Flat-Earthers could ever hope to be. The new Article about Jedi from Star Wars made all who know that Franchise cri-ge so hard that they almost died, which i call ‚physical assault’! Oh, no, wait, i dont call it that, cause I’m not a silly Wanker. But seriously: The objectively wrong and just laughable false Claims about Jedi and the Real World are one giant Joke and so they are treated like that: Scientific American has totally made a Fool out of itself, making even ‚Onision’ proud.
Google Sycamore was co-designed by me perhaps in the 1970s to the 1980s. But sure Google scientists would still come to me in MasbatePH in the 1980s for Sycamore. I knew I co-own Google that time, planned by me too, like Apple, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook, IBM, Intel, AMD, and Nvidia, and TSMC and ASML. The Chinese quantum computers were theorized and co-designed with me as early as the late 1970s. The Tamayos and Ramizos were advanced families of scientists researching and developing quantum computers. They pioneered modern computing's IBM PC, Apple computers, macOs and Windows operating systems, and microprocessors or microchips. Later, it was the Ramizos who became "academic" about computers including quantum computers (like writing for Scientific American "future" articles), while the Tamayos seemed to not cooperate. My mother and her Ramizo relatives or co-teachers had a quantum computer but would not easily share technology. The Americans, British, and Chinese had to go through children like me to get more quantum computing info. Though a kid, I was very prolific, even starting up and planning the tech giants.
Brain-mind like a quantum computer. Decoherence is of an unawaken brain-mind and the one with enlightenment is a coherent brain mind with access to the fabric of the universe.
I agree with IBM, I have a few ideas for them about this after this explanation great explanation. I would like a video about schematics and blueprints to explain them
@@coenfuse Not here I get an SSI and my n'eer to the well family would seize it I'll tell IBM then I can get off gov't assistance also I might want to play chess w/ big blue :D
@@coenfuse I love these uploads I guess I'm my dad's daughter I helped him a lot I can follow them but I get lost after a bit of the blue pints/schematics.
I enjoy you saying "bigger" because that would mean they have no idea what quantum meant, the smallest possible computer is what comes to my mind. *Is the explanation giving for quantum mechanics not outdated and inaccurate?
Unfortunately, I couldn't get more than two sentences into this as the girl narrating, like most women under 40, is speaking with too much Vocal Fry voice (not as bad as some, but seems impossible to avoid nowadays), I need quantum computing so that I can live in a simulation with no vocal fry. For the Kardashion intelligence level videos, this is fine, but it is even finding its way into intelligent topics now :(
Because unlike in conventional computing nobody can tell you how to perform a given computation. We have a very small number of quantum algorithms that are known to do (somewhat) useful things but nobody can tell you how to program an algorithm that does something other than these few choice examples. It's not even clear to me that there are that many useful quantum computing algorithms. While there is a proof that every possible classical algorithm has a quantum counterpart, that's just an existence proof. It does not mean that there is a quantum algorithm that is efficient.
@@lepidoptera9337 but why not pick the simplest of these existing algorithms and explain how it works? Would certainly be more helpful than these type of videos.
@@HR-yd5ib I can do much better than that. Imagine you have to compute everything with rotations in a high dimensional space. Quantum computing is like a giant Rubik's Cube... except that we are talking trillions of dimensions. Now, you tell me how you would use that to solve a practical problem of yours.
@@HR-yd5ib I told you: with rotations. You can find an infinite number of rotations around the same axis that are isomorphic to the addition of integers in a limited range. For non-linear operations you will have to use rotations around combinations of different axes. And therein lies the problem: which of a trillion possible axes do you have to rotate around and in what order to solve the problem you want solved? That's why it's a Rubik's Cube kind of problem. :-)
I think that the World will not become safer if the only guarantee of security is leadership in the technological race world's security must be guaranteed by political means nuclear weapons have already taught this in the last century
lmao we will easily get this just as we beat them to all other technological advances. If they say they did something first, it is always a lie. As my ukrainian professor used to say "Russia always does everything first but what they make is shit"
@@thebullybuffalo the problem is not who will receive this technology for the first time (generally speaking, this is a process of improvement and not a one-time event) The problem is the consequences for the world. Making such a technology for destruction is much easier than doing it for the good of humanity. This is a question
It will first wipe us out using advanced medicine to release virus, hack into Lockheed Martin database and use all the arsenals against us and finally clone millions of Hitler and Genghis khan.
quantum doesnt make things inherently better, and most researchers still dont know how to really make it useful in the first place dont buy into the hype, its all smoke and mirrors. quantum could be completely fucking useless and we still have no idea
its "Quantum supremacy".... ?why did not Google run the Shor algorythm with 54 qubits that would be capable of handling values up to ~1.8014398509482E+16 (and it would have been a more logical/comparable demonstration)
Simplistic for #ScientificAmerican . And QC, is not simplistic. Many many videos & websites offer too simple, inarticulate explanations. And the compact explanations would get anyone an 'F,' in my class. But such is RUclips, and any website people clog-onto, as they refuse to take time to actually...learn. No patience. They believe a three-ten minute video can explain a hundred years of history or make anyone a physicist. Yip. The video is short. The video has fancy graphics. That's it. Still Does Not explain Quantum computing, which would take tens-of-hours of video.
Scientific American was once about Science, but nowadays, it’s an embarassment beyond of what Flat-Earthers could ever hope to be. The new Article about Jedi from Star Wars made all who know that Franchise cri-ge so hard that they almost died, which i call ‚physical assault’! Oh, no, wait, i dont call it that, cause I’m not a silly Wanker. But seriously: The objectively wrong and just laughable false Claims about Jedi and the Real World are one giant Joke and so they are treated like that: Scientific American has totally made a Fool out of itself, making even ‚Onision’ proud. Thanks for making all Flat-Earthers seem like Ace-Geniusses and thanks for making all Sci-Fi-Lovers have a good Laugh, at least at the words ‚Phallic Lightsabers’.
This explanation, like every one I have read or watched, really doesn't explain how QCs will work. It talks about qbits, entanglement, and such, but how do these things contribute to a computed answer? This is like explaining a classical computer by saying it consists of binary digits and then stopping the explanation right there. I don't care how may qbits some experimental computer has. Tell me HOW it uses those qbits to do useful computation. Are there quantum logic gates for instance? Haven't heard any QC explanation tackle that question.
I soo agree with this. I am trying to find out answers to similar questions, but to no avail.
Apparently they can't do useful computations, and are very error prone. My question is like yours, and I want to know IF any QC even works, even a little bit? Is there a working QC? If there was, it would imply the many worlds theory is a universal fact. That would change the way we understand the world and the nature of the universe. Quantum computers will likely never achieve anything useful, in my opinion, because I think our understanding of quantum mechanics is severely flawed. But, if QCs manage to work, then, that means superposition really is possible, and the "magic" would become a real science. It's interesting to see how this idea is being explored, yet I have little faith in the QC's ability to achieve any problem-solving whatsoever.
@@Cicada3773 Quantum mechanics is actually the best tested framework in all of physics. It has no more flaws than any other scientific models: point being, it is incomplete (mostly with respect to gravity). That modeling of it can be difficult, but it is extremely solid. Not sure of your 'superposition/possible" words. I suspect you do not understand the term. Superposition is a very real phenomena that long predates any applications in computing. See anything by Dirac, Feynman, etc...Yes, of course, QCs are error prone. Welcome to computing. Error correction and fault tolerance are critical developmental segments in QC (entangling atoms, ions, photons is tricky) - but classical computing and IC logic have always wrestled with the same challenges - only now on a smaller scale. The end computation still occurs on a chip, btw. Classical computing has had a generation of scale and ample years of commercialization to work it out. Early classical computers could not much either. Quantum computers can certainly do computations (you can build quantum algorithms on IBM's platform in their public cloud right now) - but the real age of QC will come when they scale them to do things classical computers cannot. Likely in 5+ years. (~ a physicist with a degree in quantum mechanics)
Yes - there are quantum logic (Boolean, for example) gates that are used to abstract quantum circuit logic that are composed into focused quantum algorithms. The quantum algorithms are built for certain general computational tasks (not much difference than, say, how certain neural networks in machine/deep learning are better at some tasks vs others). There are countless videos on YT on your questions.
Fr fr fr
I watched the video twice. Once for the understanding and the second for the beautiful animations
The creations God made outside are better I believe
@@jonesyjones8026 I completely believe that there is a God, and in the light of experience in quantum physics, I know that there is a God who is almighty, He breaks all the laws of physics. This year's Nobel Prize was awarded to physicists who proved that the world is ruled by chance. And we know that there are no coincidences, it is only God's will. I greet you cordially with God.
I must disagree with other commenters. This video does not “decode” a darn thing. For instance, how does one arrange the connected qubits for different algorithms? How are initial conditions determined and set? Hows does the algorithm recognize being done? Or how about a real problem that DOESN’T use Shor’s algorithm, like finding roots for a complex polynomial? Or address the mundane, like what does the “code” look like?
I would call this video Fluff With Facts.
This is severely underrated channel I've ever seen with the greatest potential........
That could be solvable with some great creative thumbnails tho..... I think....
A great introduction. Certainly don't expect an entire explanation in eight minutes.
ok i guess my question is not "how does a quantum computer work" but rather "how does a quantum computer collapse the system to the solution"
Yes that is my question too and it did not provide answer.
Perhaps it is that you tell it the answer you want it to figure out.
When you observe it?
Same here. Even if you tell it the answer, how do you know when the answer is achieved if the only way to collapse the system is observe it? Also, iiuc, “good” encryption algorithms (since breaking encryption is often cited as a quantum use case), even when you get the keys right, you aren’t presented with a light bulb that says “unlocked!”… you just get indecipherable garbage on the other side, which again suggest you have to know what is in it already. I might have that wrong, but still…. Don’t understand 😢
Very carefully
Very clearly explained.
I still don't understand
You can't. It's total bullshit. Quantum computers will never work.
I hope I live long enough to see a quatum mobile phone with tactile volumetric display.
Excellent summary of QC.
I think I'm with Einstein on this one. I'm just not seeing the use of outputting a completely non-deterministic state and applying a constructed state to resolve for an unknown state? It seems like you need to know how to influence the non-deterministic state to get a possible answer, which I feel like in many ways would be the answer itself (maybe its easier?). unless it's useful in some other way I'm not seeing (probably).
I understand it and at the same time I don't; however, there is a greater probability I will; providing I re-watch it, and rethink my position on how Quantum Computers work.
Thats exactly what quantum means
Best explanation so far.
Decent explanation.
On, not on, Off, not off. It's computing with dimmer switches!
I don't understand how a quantum computer works...
But I do hear many people who supposedly do understand quantum mechanics complain about how quantum computers "do not try all answers at the same time" and "that is not how quantum computers work".
Excellent Explanation 👏
😊 very good transmission! With cool animation
White noise in a tin can .
how do you do addition using quantum computers for instance add 1 and 1?
You add two vectors instead of two scalars. You can do that much, much faster with a conventional computer, though.
why cant i find an actual explanation of how a Qantum computer calculates things?
like a normal computer is a complex sequence of diodes,makes sence.
like Wat a basic adder wold look like in a quantum computer?
Good interference through electromagnetic pulses may increase the probability of desired answer as superposition can generate many things . Decoherence is main issue here that is making qubits dance in a desired way😂 through our own music😂.
Yeah i didnt understand a word that was said in this "tutorial".
Im sure there is a way to explain this in a far simpler way.
An excellent introductory video.
Really i did not understand how to control q-bits!
There's nothing like physics magic tbh
Why does it matter when you look at it ? Shouldn't matter behave normally even though your not looking ?
We don't know (yet). It's not even clear what "looking at" means. It might be when a conscious being makes an observation, or it might be something less mystical-sounding that that. But what *is* clear is that whatever the underlying mechanism, "normal" behavior down at those tiny sizes does not appear to be the same as it does in our everyday macro world.
ok this is information as how quantum tech works, but what exactly can it do.. faster.. as in what programming?, coding.. all of the gadgets function ability? what exactly it helps in ?
Nobody knows. That's an unsolved problem. I have a feeling that it might actually be an unsolvable problem.
its scary to imagine these computers will be common in 500 years or so SHEESH
500? More like 20 lol
I figured error noise occurs because the suns radiation, maybe if you encased the computer in a cold and thick lead case the quibits would stay active to perform properly
It is already enclosed inside a closed chamber. check out bluefors.
how does a quantum computer also represent data?
Awesome Info 🙌
This video is underrated.
what song is used here?
With the best will in the world I still took nothing away from this video. Like many QC "explanation" videos there is no explanation of working. Only hype about what it could enable. If you strip away the waffle you get "Quantum computers work by using qbits in a clever way" .. and?
This video is misleading, it's about how a quantum computer should work. There's nothing in it about how they are preforming any computation at all, just that wave functions collapse giving magical answers. How disappointing. If you read this before the video, don't bother.
3:49 But wait 2 bit system also has 4 possible values 00,01,10,11 and 20 bit system has 2 ²⁰ posibble values = also more than milion
20 qubits have 2^20 base vectors. The total number of states is every possible superposition of those base vectors, which is exponentially more than the number of state vectors themselves.
Does cubits interfere as relativistic wavefunctions ?
Yes
I wonder how a quantum computer would handle frame rate in videogames. Would it be infinite fps or infinite frames would impossible?
Once.you measure, you get the one frame.thatnyou care about. 🤔
I would imagine it is a useless problem. You can only take advantage of problems that require massive parallelization.
Thank you
Won’t this technology be abused to break RSA keys?
did you even watch the video
Scientific American was once about Science,
but nowadays, it’s an embarassment beyond of what Flat-Earthers could ever hope to be.
The new Article about Jedi from Star Wars made all who know that Franchise cri-ge so hard that they almost died,
which i call ‚physical assault’! Oh, no, wait, i dont call it that,
cause I’m not a silly Wanker.
But seriously: The objectively wrong and just laughable false Claims about Jedi and the Real World are one giant Joke and so they are treated like that: Scientific American has totally made a Fool out of itself,
making even ‚Onision’ proud.
I understood and did not understand this video.
3 20
Google Sycamore was co-designed by me perhaps in the 1970s to the 1980s. But sure Google scientists would still come to me in MasbatePH in the 1980s for Sycamore. I knew I co-own Google that time, planned by me too, like Apple, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook, IBM, Intel, AMD, and Nvidia, and TSMC and ASML. The Chinese quantum computers were theorized and co-designed with me as early as the late 1970s.
The Tamayos and Ramizos were advanced families of scientists researching and developing quantum computers. They pioneered modern computing's IBM PC, Apple computers, macOs and Windows operating systems, and microprocessors or microchips. Later, it was the Ramizos who became "academic" about computers including quantum computers (like writing for Scientific American "future" articles), while the Tamayos seemed to not cooperate. My mother and her Ramizo relatives or co-teachers had a quantum computer but would not easily share technology. The Americans, British, and Chinese had to go through children like me to get more quantum computing info. Though a kid, I was very prolific, even starting up and planning the tech giants.
Do you have somebody to take care of you?
Increase is geometric, not exponential.
Video just explains "What a quantum computer is " not "How it works".
Asesome video, thanks
When can I get my Quantum Computer Laptop?
Roughly at the same time when anti-grav boots will become stylish. ;-)
@@lepidoptera9337 Thanks buddy.
So....When ?
Could this ever be used to serve the god of heaven and earth? Or is it the lie?
Do we have to worry about the ethics of quantum computing? Could quantum computing enable bad actors?
Brain-mind like a quantum computer. Decoherence is of an unawaken brain-mind and the one with enlightenment is a coherent brain mind with access to the fabric of the universe.
I would see a j Josephendon junction..
Somehow I think this will ultimately not be used for good purposes .....
Imagine a Quantum Server Farm
Yep, brain melted
I agree with IBM, I have a few ideas for them about this after this explanation great explanation. I would like a video about schematics and blueprints to explain them
Eager to listen
@@coenfuse Not here I get an SSI and my n'eer to the well family would seize it I'll tell IBM then I can get off gov't assistance also I might want to play chess w/ big blue :D
@@coenfuse I love these uploads I guess I'm my dad's daughter I helped him a lot I can follow them but I get lost after a bit of the blue pints/schematics.
so there's another Life .
I enjoy you saying "bigger" because that would mean they have no idea what quantum meant, the smallest possible computer is what comes to my mind. *Is the explanation giving for quantum mechanics not outdated and inaccurate?
garble garble garble
oh yes, the quantum computer. I do quantum computing all the time.
Thanks. The vocal fry really added to this video.
Cool
"How does a Quantum computer work"
Well you see, it doesn't
it works and it doesn't work at the same time :P
What motivates researchers to create a quantum computer? It seems like the use cases are just theoretical curiosities
wow
I understand why students prefer RUclips than their own college lecture
It's cool and stuff, but we actually don't want a supercomputer because it would break our *digitalized* world
Unfortunately, I couldn't get more than two sentences into this as the girl narrating, like most women under 40, is speaking with too much Vocal Fry voice (not as bad as some, but seems impossible to avoid nowadays), I need quantum computing so that I can live in a simulation with no vocal fry. For the Kardashion intelligence level videos, this is fine, but it is even finding its way into intelligent topics now :(
1 06
6 00
To get quantum computing to really shine, we need AI to help us to the next level
Why do all of these videos bother to explain superposition but never actually explain how this is used to arrive at the result of a computation?
Because unlike in conventional computing nobody can tell you how to perform a given computation. We have a very small number of quantum algorithms that are known to do (somewhat) useful things but nobody can tell you how to program an algorithm that does something other than these few choice examples. It's not even clear to me that there are that many useful quantum computing algorithms. While there is a proof that every possible classical algorithm has a quantum counterpart, that's just an existence proof. It does not mean that there is a quantum algorithm that is efficient.
@@lepidoptera9337 but why not pick the simplest of these existing algorithms and explain how it works? Would certainly be more helpful than these type of videos.
@@HR-yd5ib I can do much better than that. Imagine you have to compute everything with rotations in a high dimensional space. Quantum computing is like a giant Rubik's Cube... except that we are talking trillions of dimensions. Now, you tell me how you would use that to solve a practical problem of yours.
@@lepidoptera9337 that was about as useful as the video. 😂
How about describing how a quantum computer computes 2+2=4.
@@HR-yd5ib I told you: with rotations. You can find an infinite number of rotations around the same axis that are isomorphic to the addition of integers in a limited range. For non-linear operations you will have to use rotations around combinations of different axes. And therein lies the problem: which of a trillion possible axes do you have to rotate around and in what order to solve the problem you want solved? That's why it's a Rubik's Cube kind of problem. :-)
Please divert that investment to find a solution for this corona mess
what?
Wowwwwww...
So i can transfer drugs without transferring it
June 6, 2318
We better get this down pat before Russia or China or else 💥
I think that the World will not become safer if the only guarantee of security is leadership in the technological race
world's security must be guaranteed by political means
nuclear weapons have already taught this in the last century
lmao we will easily get this just as we beat them to all other technological advances. If they say they did something first, it is always a lie. As my ukrainian professor used to say "Russia always does everything first but what they make is shit"
@@thebullybuffalo the problem is not who will receive this technology for the first time (generally speaking, this is a process of improvement and not a one-time event)
The problem is the consequences for the world. Making such a technology for destruction is much easier than doing it for the good of humanity. This is a question
Remember the nuclear arms race Between America and Germany? That didn't bode well for Earth and now many countries on Earth have them.
Imagine how powerful super AI with quantum computing capabilities will be like? I imagine quantum AI, will be to binary AI, as binary AI is to us!
It will first wipe us out using advanced medicine to release virus, hack into Lockheed Martin database and use all the arsenals against us and finally clone millions of Hitler and Genghis khan.
quantum doesnt make things inherently better, and most researchers still dont know how to really make it useful in the first place
dont buy into the hype, its all smoke and mirrors. quantum could be completely fucking useless and we still have no idea
its "Quantum supremacy"....
?why did not Google run the Shor algorythm with 54 qubits
that would be capable of handling values up to ~1.8014398509482E+16
(and it would have been a more logical/comparable demonstration)
Quantum supremacy
Audius & Telcoin ^^^^^^
this taught nothing, except keywords, did it?
РУССКИЕ ИМЕЮТСЯ?🙄
It's poor explanation is all I can say. Too high level and incomplete to be of any use.
Yes, that was complete bullshit. ;-)
Simplistic for #ScientificAmerican . And QC, is not simplistic. Many many videos & websites offer too simple, inarticulate explanations. And the compact explanations would get anyone an 'F,' in my class. But such is RUclips, and any website people clog-onto, as they refuse to take time to actually...learn. No patience. They believe a three-ten minute video can explain a hundred years of history or make anyone a physicist. Yip. The video is short. The video has fancy graphics. That's it. Still Does Not explain Quantum computing, which would take tens-of-hours of video.
Exactly. But it wasn't their anyway.
this is no good i have shut down all quantum computers and pull the plug on AI
1st
Scientific American was once about Science,
but nowadays, it’s an embarassment beyond of what Flat-Earthers could ever hope to be.
The new Article about Jedi from Star Wars made all who know that Franchise cri-ge so hard that they almost died,
which i call ‚physical assault’! Oh, no, wait, i dont call it that,
cause I’m not a silly Wanker.
But seriously: The objectively wrong and just laughable false Claims about Jedi and the Real World are one giant Joke and so they are treated like that: Scientific American has totally made a Fool out of itself,
making even ‚Onision’ proud.
Thanks for making all Flat-Earthers seem like Ace-Geniusses and thanks for making all Sci-Fi-Lovers have a good Laugh, at least at the words ‚Phallic Lightsabers’.
Worst explanation ever!
You lost me at "if someone asked you"
I don't understand anything 😢