This is a piece of alleged technology that is based on basic physics that has not been established.
That does sound like a problem.
this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
480 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
67987 readers
3880 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I love these slides about how quantum cryptography attacks are a made up scenario https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/bollocks.pdf
Dude is a comedic genius
Prime factorisation is indeed nobody's primary idea of what a quantum computer will be useful for in practice any time soon, but it cannot be denied that Shor's algorithm is the first and only method of prime factorisation we have discovered which can finish in realistic time with realistic resources.
And that means that RSA is no longer as safe as it once was, justifying the process of finding alternatives.
I'm sorry - did you read the slides?
Indeed I did. They seem to be pointing to the fact that current machines are not factoring primes in any serious way.
Does this contradict my point?
load more comments
(2 replies)
We should find out next week at APS Global if it's really a problem or a case of Physicist Sergey Frolov, the author of that quote, failing to understand what's been done.
Microsoft could be full of shit about Majorana 1 of course but it would be damned odd for them to make a claim like this without being able to back it up; the fallout would be horrendous.
I have to agree with this. Say what you will about MS, but it'd be odd to claim something this crazy that they can't at least sorta backup.
AI will figure it out my dude!!
Yeah, most quantum science at the moment is largely fraudulent. It's not just Microsoft. It's being developed because it's being taught in business schools as the next big thing, not because anybody has any way to use it.
Any of the "quantum computers" you see in the news are nothing more than press releases about corporate emulators functioning how they think it might work if it did work, but it's far too slow to be used for anything.
So glad we dereguled the market so everything is a crypto scam now.
🌎🧑🚀🔫
I just saw on Linked In that in 12 months "quantum AI" is going to be where it's at. Uh.... really? Do I hear "crypto-quantum AI?"
I used a hybrid of near-shore telepresence and on-site scrum sessions to move fast and put the quantum metaverse on a content-addressable de-fi AI blockchain
load more comments
(1 replies)
That sounds like something they say your washing detergent has to clean stains better.
Crypto-quantum AI+ MaXX?
Quantum science is not fraudulent, incredible leaps are being made with the immense influx of funding.
Quantum industry is a different beast entirely, with scientific rigour being corrupted by stock price management.
It's an objective fact that quantum computers indeed exist now, but only at a very basic prototype level. Don't trust anything a journalist says about them, but they are real, and they are based on technology we had no idea if would ever be possible.
Well, I love being wrong! Are you able to show a documented quantum experiment that was carried out on a quantum computer (and not an emulator using a traditional architecture)?
How about a use case that isn't simply for breaking encryption, benchmarking, or something deeply theoretical that they have no way to know how to actually program for or use in the real world?
I'm not requesting these proofs to be snarky, but simply because I've never seen anything else beyond what I listed.
When I see all the large corporations mentioning the processing power of these things, they're simply mentioning how many times they can get an emulated tied bit to flip, and then claiming grandiose things for investors. That's pretty much it. To me, that's fraudulent (or borderline) corporate BS.
Hell yes! I'd love to share some stuff.
One good example of a quantum computer is the Lukin group neutral atoms work. As the paper discusses, they managed to perform error correction procedures making 48 actual logical qubits and performing operations on them. Still not all that practically useful, but it exists, and is extremely impressive from a physics experiment viewpoint.
There are also plenty of meaningful reports on non-emulated machines from the corporate world. From the big players examples include the Willow chip from Google and Heron from IBM being actual real quantum devices doing actual (albeit basic) operations. Furthermore there are a plethora of smaller companies like OQC and Pasqal with real machines.
On applications, this review is both extensive and sober, outlining the known applications with speedups, costs and drawbacks. Among the most exciting are Fermi-Hubbard model dynamics (condensed matter stuff), which is predicted to have exponential speedup with relatively few resources. These all depend on a relatively narrow selection of tricks, though. Among interesting efforts to fundamentally expand what tricks are available is this work from the Babbush group.
Let me know if that's not what you were looking for.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
It’s…not shocking exactly, but a little surprising and a lot disappointing that so much of finance is now targeted at “let’s make a thing that we read about in sci fi novels we read as kids.”
Focusing on STEM and not the humanities means we have a bunch of engineers who think “book thing cool” and have zero understanding of how allegory works.
Elno has just reinforced that if you lie enough to become a billionaire, that the market will reward you for YEARS. Possibly forever of you don’t let them find out your a power hungry amazing who want to ruin the whole country.
Most competent engineers don't think that. They know and understand the limitations of what they're working on. They just do it because the finance bros pay.
Check it, yo. In the 90s all the articles and rumors around quantum computing were exactly the same. Exactly.
Whenever I hear about some new quantum computing breakthrough, I spend about five seconds wondering if it's real and then I feel very nostalgic because no, it never is.
I just assume it's in a superposition of both being real and not real at the same time.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Quantum computer do exist. And have existed for some time now. Breakthroughs have been achieved several times.
Sure, sure and it’s interesting stuff. But not anywhere near useful in the sense people mean when they talk about computers.
They are as useful as the Large Hadron Collider, or the New Horizons probe.
They are instruments of practical scientific research. They may have some return in useful technology or not, but science is always worth it.
Except quantum computers do indeed exist right now, and did not in the 90's. Sadly, the hype and corporate interests still make it difficult to tell truth from nonsense.
Yeah, sure they exist. Much like the ENIAC. And it’s cool stuff to work with. It’s just not anywhere close to practical. And it never has been.
If you had asked someone in the 90s if they could imagine half the shit that we have technologically they wouldn’t believe it. Just because something seems surreal, doesn’t mean it’s fake.
Whether this new chip can do the things it claims we’ll see soon enough.
I mean, I was a kid in the 90s and I feel like we’re behind what I expected in most respects.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Slammed or lightly pounded?
S L A M M E D
Just like I S L A M M E D my penis in the car door.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Are we SLAMming quantum computers now?
What do you expect from the company which promised that windows 10 would be the last one? xD
Microsoft:
You can tell that someone is lying about their work in quantum physics when they claim to understand quantum physics.
Maybe they were smoking too much Majorana.
Of course. Not a single quantum computer has done anything but test programs and quantum-specific benchmarks. Until a quantum computer finally does something a normal computer regularly does, but faster, we should simply ignore this area.
EDIT: could the downvoters state a single occasion where a quantum computer outmatched a normal computer on a real problem. And with that I mean something more elaborate than winning naughts and crosses, or something like that.
until it's better we should simply ignore this
That seems like a strange comment to make. How will it get better if we don't spend the time and effort to make it better?
With quantum computing if you ignore it you are simultaneously not ignoring it?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Many people in lemmy is highly primitivist and tech conservatives. Meaning that they don't actually want any technological progress.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Microsoft is slated to back up its claims and success in quantum computing next week at an American Physical Society (APS) meeting in California."
Well if they try to put on a show like Elon did with his dancing robots and what not we can be %100 sure it is a pyramid scheme.
What's next Theranus doesn't actually make thousand dollar tests for a dollar?
view more: next ›