Posted on 09/21/2019 2:06:43 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
According to a report in the Financial Times, a team of researchers from Google led by John Martinis have demonstrated quantum supremacy for the first time. This is the point at which a quantum computer is shown to be capable of performing a task that’s beyond the reach of even the most powerful conventional supercomputer. The claim appeared in a paper that was posted on a NASA website, but the publication was then taken down. Google did not respond to a request for comment from MIT Technology Review.
(Excerpt) Read more at technologyreview.com ...
Skynet is now active.
This I can agree with.
Who is going to check their answer to make sure that it’s right?
And another but: Quantum computers are still a long way from being ready for mainstream use. The machines are notoriously prone to errors, because even the slightest change in temperature or tiny vibration can destroy the delicate state of qubits. Researchers are working on machines that will be easier to build, manage, and scale, and some computers are now available via the computing cloud. But it could still be many years before quantum computers that can tackle a wide range of problems are widely available.
Not sure, guess we will find out in 10000 years
Something fun to listen to while you wait
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yesyhQkYrQM
Confident that this is a lower standard than actually doing something like hanging your own carcass in midair over the dunes of Kill Devil Hills.
If true we are closer to war than ever before simply because the World with the UN as justification will demand to have that power given to it or they must fight to destroy the company, nation or peoples who hold that power....
All tech is a double-edged sword. Depends on the ends to which humans use it. Except that AI linked to quantum computers may be the genie that escapes from the bottle. Just make sure that we have our hands on the “kill switch”.
” Confident that this is a lower standard than actually doing something like hanging your own carcass in midair over the dunes of Kill Devil Hills.”
Using the aviation analogy... quantum computers are closer to Leonardo’s sketchbook than the Wright Flyer.
Quantum computer project #1: Have it tell us how to build a better one.
Amazing!
Wonder what kind of ‘rituals’ the engineers at google dabble in that they are so obsessed with controlling everything?
God still laughs at their ‘technology’.
In the mid '70's my brother bought a computer for Monsanto that required a heavy duty AC in it's dedicated room and had about as much capability as a Tandy (Radio Shack) laptop that he bought for his daughter in the early 90's. We will all have quantum watches by 2030!
I'm going to skip all that mess and start developing sputum computing... Will be far more flexible and powerful on the gonad-computing scale...
Will title the grant request as "Project To Reduce Whiteness And Expand Diversity In Computing Technologies"... Now have to figure out how to efficiently spend millions and millions of untraceable dollars....
Is that not Mark Zuckerberg? What is he doing on a Google thread?
The Chinese had a two year window of opportunity based upon a peak of strength and readiness. They are being countered by game theorist to achieve a strategic stalemate.
From the Chinese vantage point, it appeared there was a good possibility to win without unlimited confrontation. They cannot accept not-winning, cannot contradict the long-strategy position formulated by their senior party members.
We on the other hand, are not playing our hand toward achieving what they envision as a win. Skewed age/sex demographics have longer term consequences. Their slide will quietly gain momentum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIRT6xRQkf8
Contrary to what most economists and analysts tell us, a large population, or even a growing population, might be more harmful than beneficial in the new age of AI and robots. Indeed, if you're a military analyst you might come to regard a huge population mass of like 1.4 billion to be a burden rather than a strategic advantage. What a huge target! How do you feed it, how do you control it, what happens when he gets out of control?
If we want to talk about national wealth, much depends on how we define it but if we define it as the mass of goods divided by the number of supplicants for those goods we begin to ask, if our GNP is produced by artificial intelligence and robots, do we need more than a billion people to increase production? If we are dividing the sum of production by the population, would not a more manageable population make us richer rather than poorer?
If we are entering a technological age in which wealth at the level of conception is done by a very few brilliant human minds while the bulk of production is done by smart machines, how do we distribute the wealth? If we don't distribute the wealth, do we risk revolution? If we do distribute the wealth will we certainly kill off incentive?
It seems to me these questions become all the more intractable the more disparity between the elite and the consuming class is increased by virtue of size of population.
Most of the arguments in favor of large population, or more intelligently, of growing population, center on the need to create markets for consumption. In an age in which 3D printing is making us rethink the entire concept of economies of scale, should we not also rethink this maxim?
Finally, in Japan the age of robots may well make the geisha class redundant. Why not in China where there exists a disparity of number between the sexes?
Okay, perhaps that is taking this robot business too far.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.