Cykablast3r
Cykablast3r t1_ivv8n00 wrote
Reply to comment by DILDOS_UNITED in IBM unveils its 433 qubit Osprey quantum computer by vom2r750
> The essential difference between bits and qbits is the ability to represent superpositions. That’s basically ‘same but way, way, waaaay more powerful’.
No it's not. Not at all. qbits aren't more powerful than bits, they're completely different. A conventional computer would be far better suited for the tasks we already use it for.
Quantum computers aren't being developed as a replacement for conventional computers, they're being developed for things conventional computers can't manage, namely combinatorics. You don't need combinatorics in your daily life.
>It’s very strange to me that you think people wouldn’t 100% build and find uses for a train in their pocket if they could. History has certainly shown otherwise.
No it hasn't? I don't know anyone who owns a train. A car is much more useful.
Cykablast3r t1_ivu3gfe wrote
Reply to comment by DILDOS_UNITED in IBM unveils its 433 qubit Osprey quantum computer by vom2r750
>That wasn’t exactly a guess now was it?
What wasn't?
>The argument ‘what would you use it for’ is the exact same argument they made 20 years ago for why you’d need 32GBs of RAM in your pc. Well maybe 30 years ago, but exponential growth and all that.
This argument is a false equivalence. Quantum computing isn't "same but more powerful" it's a completely different thing with a different use case. You're comparing cars to trains.
"I can't wait to have my own train in 30 years."
Cykablast3r t1_ivt58gc wrote
Reply to comment by DILDOS_UNITED in IBM unveils its 433 qubit Osprey quantum computer by vom2r750
I can take a guess? What would the tasks be like that you'd have use for a quantum computer?
Cykablast3r t1_ivt3sfd wrote
Reply to comment by DILDOS_UNITED in IBM unveils its 433 qubit Osprey quantum computer by vom2r750
A quantum computer functions differently than a conventional computer. A quantum computer isn't better or faster at achieving tasks you'd do with your phone.
Cykablast3r t1_ivt3dlh wrote
Reply to comment by DILDOS_UNITED in IBM unveils its 433 qubit Osprey quantum computer by vom2r750
No it's not. 32gb of RAM would have been an improvement of your current system. A quantum computer isn't an improvement over a phone.
Cykablast3r t1_ivs2kwd wrote
Reply to comment by shiddyfiddy in IBM unveils its 433 qubit Osprey quantum computer by vom2r750
What use would you have for a quantum computer?
Cykablast3r t1_irw6kus wrote
Reply to comment by Allmightydohllah in Scientists have developed a low-cost small device (15x20cm) that can harness energy from wind as gentle as a light breeze and store it as electricity. With wind at 2 m/s the device can produce 3 volts and generate power of up to 290 microwatts (sufficient to power a commercial sensor) by nimnlil
Could both of those things not easily be connected to the grid? Seems like this would just add complexity where it isn't needed.
Cykablast3r t1_irw3jy8 wrote
Reply to Scientists have developed a low-cost small device (15x20cm) that can harness energy from wind as gentle as a light breeze and store it as electricity. With wind at 2 m/s the device can produce 3 volts and generate power of up to 290 microwatts (sufficient to power a commercial sensor) by nimnlil
What's the use case here?
Cykablast3r t1_ivvhnux wrote
Reply to comment by DILDOS_UNITED in IBM unveils its 433 qubit Osprey quantum computer by vom2r750
>That’s so funny because IBM’s website says they are more powerful.
Right...
Yeah whatever mate, you do you. Time will tell I guess.