Quantum computers finally come out

>quantum computers finally come out
>Sup Forums will stll complain about slow benchmarks

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor's_algorithm#Quantum_part:_Period-finding_subroutine
reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/5xt03g/ibm_to_build_quantum_computers_selling_machines/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>mfw intel quantum shills still shitting up the thread

Will it run Minecraft on 9 screens with shaders?

THANKS BASED IBM

AT LEAST A COMPANING THAT ISN'T BULLSHITTING

SCREW LETNI AND DMA

is IBM dare i say it back ?

True quantum or quantum-annealing?
Not that it particularly matters too much, currently the practical application of either one is extremely niche.

faster botnets

probably true quantum, they aren't dwave

What the fuck is "true quantum computer"?

Does it fucking vanish to another x,y,z point in the Universe if I don't keep observing it?

>Sup Forums will stll complain about slow benchmarks

OF COURSE
THAT TOTALLY NOT RIGGED JS BENCHMARK MADE BY GOOGLE RUNS 0.3MS LONGER IN FIREFOX

FIREKEKS ON SUICIDE WATCH, NO SIGN OF RECOVERY IN SIGHT

> mfw not only NSA and CIA niggers can decrypt AES es RSA encrypted files with quantum algorithms in feasible time

I'm somewhat skeptical though, we can simulate quantum computers, but there are several obstackles that we haven't overcome yet to build an actual one that isn't specialised only for one simple task.

Are they gonna be x86_64?
Don't care about some shit architecture nobody produces software for.

WHO NEEDS QUANTUM PARALLELISM
DO YOU ONLY CRACK PASSWORDS ALL DAY LONG
YOU WILL ALWAYS NEED SINGLE CORE PERFORMANCE
KEK DOA QUANTUMFAGS ON SUICIDE WATCH

>[Post a Reply]
buttplasted amd nigger cattle

...

W-Would Bitcoin become worthless?

So does it run Linux

Yes.

FUCK

maybe

I'm sure web developers will come up with a way to make websites unresponsive and laggy even on quantum computers

>literaly made a joke about quantum computers earlier in the day, how it's useless unless there is software that can actually with it it
>but there is bugs in the quantum bios
>the memory is holding it back Reeeee
>in the future quantum computers will be good so you should buy one now, even if it underperforms vs everything on the market.

DUDE
QUANTUM
I FEEL IT

>if I look away for even a moment my computer might reappear elsewhere in the galaxy and an ayylmao could see the disgusting fetish porn I was looking at

>there is no privacy in the quantum realm

>I FEEL IT
>>>
>Anonymous 03/07/17(Tue)14:58:18 No.59283053▶
>File: 1361174205065.jpg (52 KB, 400x330)
>52 KB
>
> >if I look away for even a moment my computer might reappear elsewhere in the galaxy and an ayylmao could see the disgusting fetish porn I was looking at
Or perfect privacy. Whenever someone observes your message it will change.

First two quotes were accidental, sorry.

Wait for proper gaming benchmarks you IBM shills, I bet they are worthless and overpriced against my i7 7700k :^)

Intel shills shitposted so hard they became a meme.

Many shills are bots

IBM's will have 50 qubits, while D-Wave has a couple thousand which are not true, just a bunch of 8 qubit nodes in "parallel" (I don't really understand this tech desu), leading me to believe that those 50 qubits will be "true". Pls someone correct me if I'm wrong.

I've heard that AES is not vulnerable to this, only RSA, because of some prime thingy. Also, you would need more qubits to be actually capable of decrypting RSA used in practice, so we are not doomed yet. If they could decrypt RSA, everyone would be freaking out right now.

this is clickbait btw. quantum computers are not suitable for general computing and will only be used by corporations for special purposes, or in research labs. The subject is too complex to say "millions of times faster than anything ever made!!! XDD"

Can't crack hashes with a quantum computer, buddy.

Wait, IBM still exists?

you bet they will

Not at all. Just imagine the USB superposition but instead it's your entire computer.

AES is also vulnerable because the standard key lengths are 128, 192 and 256. To be quantum safe, we need larger key sizes.

I don't even know what Quantum computer is.
I haven't seen any actual explanation of this shit anywhere.

They never left?

This was my first thought.

Yeah with symmetric all you need to do is increase your key size which is what you do when computing gets better anyway. With most asymmetric systems your shit is broke.

Explain to a layman like me why this is a big deal

Also how long until quantum computers are actually affordable for the plebs

there's only like 1000 people who do. everyone else memorizes high level concepts which are actually not completely accurate.

my (oversimplified) understanding is: quantum computers use qubits instead of bits. qubits have a third state besides "on" and "off" (the two states of a bit). this state is the superposition, which is like being both on and off at the same time. somehow these qubits allow us to write algorithms that can solve specific problems much faster than a classical computer.

>being excited about IBM
Oh wow some business men wearing suits made some boring product for businesses. Call me when Apple does it better for consumers.

Quantum computers will start a security crises

They'll be able to brute force most encryptions, I can't wait for all the shit hitting the fan

quantum computers have the potential to easily crack encryption keys. which means the first group to successfully do this can basically fuck everyone over. they can hack every bank, every government, every email server, etc with ease.

they are likely not suitable for general computing, and are best for specific tasks (like cracking encryption keys), so you will never use one yourself.

Am I going to have to learn ternary now?

Oh fugg

i don't think so. the advantage isn't the fact that there's a 3rd state, it's the fact that you can use certain quantum properties of a superposition. quantum algorithms use complex math that you likely won't understand unless you're a physicist.

for example: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor's_algorithm#Quantum_part:_Period-finding_subroutine

How did they get around error correction? Last I remember that doesn't scale linearly. Meaning they need 7 qubits to ensure 3 were working, so they would need hundreds extra for 50

I almost died.

Ya faster computing would have no marketability in the consumer sector ;)

>qubits have a third state besides "on" and "off" (the two states of a bit).
That's not really right. It's more like a probability of being on/off. You can poke it and modify it in various ways but it collapses and becomes binary as soon as you try to find out what its value is.

>You can poke it and modify it in various ways but it collapses and becomes binary as soon as you try to find out what its value is.
so they're SJWbits?

OH SHIT IM FEELING IT
TAKYON

THE SINGULARITY

H A P P E N I N G

where we at \b\ros

>open google
>doesn't work

>flip entire computer over

>open google
>still doesn't work

>flip computer over again

>open google
>finally works

Quantum kek

But isn't "true" quantum encryption invulnerable to brute force methods?

DELET

His point is that comparing quantum computers to the normal ones is comparing apples to oranges. They are better at some specific tasks, but won't necessarily yield a performance increase in normal everyday tasks, not to mention the fact that they probably cost an arm and a leg, and that their cooling uses a fuckton of power.

Sure pal ;) keep running that sandy bridge until 2050

My understanding is that quantum computing is great for massively parallel tasks but absolute shit at general computing.
Wouldn't that mean that they'd be great graphics cards?

HURRY SOMEONE CREATE A QUANTUM CRYPTOCURRENCY ALGORITHM AND BUY 1000$ ON IT AND BECOME BILLIONAIRE FOR THE NEXT 10 GENERATIONS

>Wouldn't that mean that they'd be great graphics cards?
it would mean a lot more than that.

but quantum computers are probabilistic, it would only be a good graphics care 90% of the time.

the other 10% it would give you bad frames.

Please stop posting

>it would mean a lot more than that.
Obviously it would, I was just countering his assertion that they'd have no consumer use.
>but quantum computers are probabilistic, it would only be a good graphics care 90% of the time.
>the other 10% it would give you bad frames.
Couldn't you just render frames in advance (or dramatically higher than the screen's refresh rate) to stop the user from noticing?

>Couldn't you just render frames in advance (or dramatically higher than the screen's refresh rate) to stop the user from noticing?
how would you tell if the frame was correct or not without having another processing unit that actually rendered the correct frame?

best you could do is run it 10 times and pick the most likely outcome and hope thats correct.

muh gaymens

>Obviously it would, I was just countering his assertion that they'd have no consumer use.
to add on to this.

you can run machine learning algorithms on this but last time I checked which was 3 years ago they could only do SVM.

the AI implications would be enormous and its something the press releases arent talking about for some reason.

It takes an enormous amount of time and energy to use these things. And they aren't proven to be more efficient than a classical computer at many compute tasks yet.

You need a truly massive workload that has the potential for quantum speed up (like breaking RSA or calculating discrete log) to justify the latency overhead.

Thats why IBM is asking people to figure out how to program a quantum computer. There is no real killer app for quantum computing, outside quantum simulation.

>but quantum computers are probabilistic, it would only be a good graphics care 90% of the time.
>the other 10% it would give you bad frames.
>modern gpus are binary. They would only display information 50% of the time
>the other 50% would be a blank screen

This is true for AMD.

and when it does display a frame its correct 100% of the time.

good job being a retard.

Sorry that i have a basic grasp of the concept of computing

And you have no grasp of a quantum computer.

no, there's a hard limit for the number of bitcoins there will ever be
maybe the first person to use a quantum computer will get rich fast at first and the price for them would drop momentarily, but then it should raise back up

they haven't made a computer in over a decade
no consumer products use IBM processors anymore (Wii U went out of production)

they've just been a bunch of autists making new iterations of their PowerPC architecture that nobody uses

they better come back and slap Intel/AMD/Qualcoms asses

couldn't IBM just do it themselves before they start selling the computer?

actually couldn't IBM just mine bitcoins without even selling this computer? I think that's more profitable.

profitable for you and me maybe, not for one of the biggest companies in the world

You were an acident

>Your computers quantum processor is entangled to an exact clone in the NSA so they can watch you no matter where you are

Trinary code.

I thought it was a shitpost but then it was quality

>They examine their clone
>The quantum state collapses and your machine suddenly crashes

If you don't understand it that's fine, post a link, but don't be spreading retarded misinformation

kekd

mfw quantum thinkpads

Yea maybe in 20 years.

>no "The Earth is an oblate spheroid"

garbage meme bro

I just want sword art online to be real already and that we kick start the virtual reality age already.

Yeah but can it emulate PS3

How larger? Is there a better alternative?

It could probably run linux with a windows VM, running a PS3 emulator with much better performance than the PS3 itself.

Saw this on reddit (my homepage) yesterday, weird thing was not even 10 minutes after it was posted the entire thread was filled with
>omg fuck IBM they just announce shit and never deliver
>IBM just want people to code for them and then delay the hardware so they can buy up the code for cheap
and other shit, all upvoted to 1000+ points within hours, was pretty surreal to see that kind of shilling in action

Here's the thread for anyone interested: reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/5xt03g/ibm_to_build_quantum_computers_selling_machines/

>linking rebbit

fake news / data mining

They're right, you know.

Another example
>Classic IBM snake oil. They'll get some deep pocketed dummies to buy into it and then we'll never hear from them again.
Where is this coming from? I hardly ever hear IBM announcing anything in the news, why is everyone there acting like IBM do this every day? Am I missing something?
I'm pretty sure the only thing fake is the comments

How big would a quantum PC be? How much power usage?