this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
465 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

66584 readers
3948 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago

"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.

[–] portifornia@lemmy.world 23 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Slammed πŸ’₯ πŸ¦Ήβ€β™‚οΈ

πŸ™„

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

Ka-POW! ZAP!

[–] trumboner@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

Of course its going to be unreliable after you slam it!

What do you expect from the company which promised that windows 10 would be the last one? xD

Are we SLAMming quantum computers now?

Maybe they were smoking too much Majorana.

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 100 points 2 days ago (3 children)

This is a piece of alleged technology that is based on basic physics that has not been established.

That does sound like a problem.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 63 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

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

[–] lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] sepi@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm sorry - did you read the slides?

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

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?

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 25 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Gerudo@lemm.ee 17 points 1 day ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 53 points 1 day ago (7 children)

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.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Quantum computer do exist. And have existed for some time now. Breakthroughs have been achieved several times.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 11 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, sure and it’s interesting stuff. But not anywhere near useful in the sense people mean when they talk about computers.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 18 hours ago

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.

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago

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.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I just assume it's in a superposition of both being real and not real at the same time.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago

Well played.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 59 points 1 day ago (6 children)

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.

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] AceTKen@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] Kondeeka@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Use cases are generally problems with very large amount of factors that are not feasible to calculate with normal comouters, think about chemical/medicine simulation and logistics optimization or public transport timetables.

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 7 points 18 hours ago

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.

[–] Rooskie91@discuss.online 39 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So glad we dereguled the market so everything is a crypto scam now.

[–] Misterboyfriend@lemmy.world 5 points 20 hours ago

πŸŒŽπŸ§‘β€πŸš€πŸ”«

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

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?"

[–] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.zip 4 points 19 hours ago

That sounds like something they say your washing detergent has to clean stains better.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

QUANTUM AI? IN my blockchain? It's more likely than you think!

[–] Num10ck@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

'distributed compute' using blockchain to farm out ai instances, is a web3 thang.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)

What's next Theranus doesn't actually make thousand dollar tests for a dollar?

[–] anubis119@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Slammed or lightly pounded?

[–] LinyosT@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 day ago

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)
[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

COME ON AND SLAM

AND WELCOME TO THE JAM

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] danekrae@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
[–] ogmios@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You can tell that someone is lying about their work in quantum physics when they claim to understand quantum physics.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί