General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGoogle Claims a Quantum Breakthrough That Could Change Computing.
By Cade Metz
Oct. 23, 2019
Updated 5:10 a.m. ET
SAN FRANCISCO Google said on Wednesday that it had achieved a long-sought breakthrough called quantum supremacy, which could allow new kinds of computers to do calculations at speeds that are inconceivable with todays technology.
In a paper published in the science journal Nature, Google said its research lab in Santa Barbara, Calif., had reached a milestone that scientists had been working toward since the 1980s: Its quantum computer performed a task that isnt possible with current technology.
In this case, a mathematical calculation that the largest supercomputers could not complete in under 10,000 years was done in 3 minutes 20 seconds, Google said in its paper.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/technology/quantum-computing-google.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Dennis Donovan
(18,770 posts)Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,501 posts).
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,501 posts)years ago, our kid was hooked on it. Totally on her own.
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)FM123
(10,054 posts)abqtommy
(14,118 posts)I've been suspicious of Google as a corporate entity for many years now and have worked to avoid associating myself with them to any great extent.
Perseus
(4,341 posts)The same with Microsoft and other big corporations in the tech industry. I avoid Facebook like the plague.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)Be anything but awesome?
The problem is never knowledge. Only distribution of knowledge. And Google is very forthcoming about their science.
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)they have done to themselves. Boogle and fakebook are very dangerous companies and will become even more so unless they are heavily regulated and put in check.
LonePirate
(13,429 posts)If other systems cannot complete it, how do they know the result is the correct one, rather than a consistent artifact generated by the new system? Did an independent, second system reach the same result?
PCIntern
(25,572 posts)Which I modified some and yes, the answer is correct.
(This is a Republicans answer to the question. Just state a lie as a fact and stonewall)
docgee
(870 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,027 posts)... that can be verified in seconds with a standard system. Verifying a two-factor number can take a few hours or days by hand to multiply out the two factors, if it is very large, but it is verifiable even without a computer.
Another test would be to find the primes used encrypt a text. If they are 128 bit primes (or some sufficient number of bits), it can take times like those mentioned to find them, but you can test them in milliseconds by decrypting the text.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,027 posts)IBM disputes that the calculation would take more than two and a half days, not 10,000 years.
As they say, "developing".
Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)Buns_of_Fire
(17,188 posts)And the computer answered, "There is now."
thesquanderer
(11,990 posts)Dr. Strange
(25,921 posts)docgee
(870 posts)Sancho
(9,070 posts)2naSalit
(86,743 posts)herding cats
(19,566 posts)Until someone figures out a way to reinvent it again, it's dead.
Iggo
(47,563 posts)I said almost exactly the same thing below.
As soon as I read "10,000 years" that's the first thing that jumped into my mind.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)AES-256 was something on the order of 10^51 years to be brute forced by 50 theoretical supercomputers. Knocking that down to 10^47 years is still a very long time.
Iggo
(47,563 posts)Fortinbras Armstrong
(4,473 posts)It can't be broken. The problem, of course, is generating such a set of numbers. Atmospheric noise, solar flux, that sort of thing will do.
What you cannot do to achieve true randomness is use some sort of computer algorithm. As John von Neuman said, "Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin."
Iggo
(47,563 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,249 posts)If they solved all problems, all limitations, all disease, would we still think we're alive? Can it go backwards in time and make changes? Who will control it, and who will pay for it? Will Trumpers wrest control from IT scientists? Will it prevent war? Make youth eternal? Will only beautiful people use it?
You get the idea. Call me skeptical.
GoneOffShore
(17,340 posts)Crowman2009
(2,499 posts)This will change nothing for everybody else.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)Duppers
(28,125 posts)of developers do very well.
My son, a deep learning specialist, personally knows a Google employee, a developer, making $1M. Google employs thousands but probably around only 40 people make $1m+.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,018 posts)a dash of each, I suspect. Power and greed will soon follow.
Tech
(1,771 posts)to pursue both with the tax breaks the company as well as their overlords receive.
still_one
(92,325 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)Here we go.
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)My childhood science fiction coming to life.
NoMoreRepugs
(9,451 posts)bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Refinements in severe weather tracking to save lives comes to mind. Better hurricane models, too.
kairos12
(12,866 posts)A scientist wanted to create the world's most powerful computer. He did this by chaining together all the world's most powerful supercomputers to one terminal.
The great day arrived and he sat at the terminal staring at the blinking cursor. All the scientists behind him eagerly waiting for the first inquiry. The lead scientist thought for a moment and said, " I know just what to ask."
He types into the terminal, Is there a God?
The computer takes a moment, and sends a response: THERE IS NOW!
Dr. Strange
(25,921 posts)It's a short short story by Frederic Brown:
Answer