Doom Running on Qubits? The Current State of Quantum Computers

[@dominic.h.3363]

Decades ago the running gag was that "computers are great at creating problems only they can solve" referring to their inability to be truly practical, whereas nowadays they are performing essential tasks. Quantum computers are in the same situation today. So just give them two more decades.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

We'll get them in practical form right after fusion and AGI are commonplace.

[@dominic.h.3363]

@@Sonny_McMacsson Third response attempt: AGI requires either a breakthrough in approach or an extremely large dataset using current methods. We're already seeing diminishing returns as datasets grow, which could lead to significant power usage per query. However, if fusion energy were to be solved, that power problem might become manageable.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

@@dominic.h.3363 Real general intelligence doesn't need a very large dataset nor much power, so I'd say the approach is wrong. Language has no intrinsic meaning either and more pattern matching won't produce actual intelligence. Just throwing more power at it is a waste of time and just wasteful overall.

[@billweirdo9657]

​@Sonny_McMacsson been saying the same thing in regards to true machine intelligence. ( I don't like the term AI it's really nonsensical)

[@zimriel]

@@dominic.h.3363 KZbin's algorithm is a joke, and won't even tell you what induced the silent deletion. Really really hoping DJT delivers on the bill-of-rights promise.

[@Cianan-vw1lb]

The programming for analog computers I've seen so far consists of describing a problem as a circuit and then wiring it, in software, as a patch panel for an analog computer. If this was like that, it takes a remarkable imagination to turn Dune into an analog patch panel.

[@d00kiebird]

Frank Herbert's Doom

[@peterschmidt3551]

Yes, quantum computation is not procedural. The entire calculation happens in one step. It isn't like normal programming where you have sequences of instructions. You could say there is just one big instruction in a quantum program.

[@garanceadrosehn9691]

I work at RPI, which has an IBM quantum computer right in the building that I work in. People will never use quantum computers for running simple games (like Doom). *Never.* That's a ludicrous goal. There is nothing about the nature of quantum computing which would make it "better" for running Doom, even if we had a million qubits to play with, all of which ran at room temperature. However, here are other types problems where the nature of quantum computing *is* an advantage (at least in theory), although we're clearly limited by the number of qubits available in any one computer, and by the significant challenges of error correction in these computers. Factoring large numbers is an example of that. "Quantum supremacy" always refers to using a quantum computer with a quantum-specific algorithm for one specific task. That's why previous claims of Quantum supremacy have fallen, because all it takes is for someone to solve that specific task using a better non-quantum algorithm for that task.

[@VolkerHett]

Oh come on! The first - ok, second - thing I did on that brand new computer based rtty system on our brand new frigate in 1982 was running the star trek game written in basic.

[@PB-ib3po]

I’m a third year aero/mech at RPI. Didn’t expect to find someone like you here

[@lasarith2]

So is that a Yes/No Answer 😉

[@garanceadrosehn9691]

@@VolkerHett - If you want to put up $50 million for your own personal quantum computer, then feel free to play games.

[@riseandshinejp]

Quantum is why all my passwords are over 45 characters now. They are lying to all of us about how limited quantum is currently. The gigantic quantum computer the nsa has for example.

[@velisvideos6208]

It will be fascinating to see which comes first: a practical quantum computer or a practical fusion reactor. It is almost certain that we'll have flying cars first...

[@allengoodwin7043]

"We're about ten years away from that." *ten years later* "We've made amazing progress and we're about ten years away rom that! ". 😂😂😂

[@TML0677]

@@allengoodwin7043 meanwhile... give us zillions of dollars!

[@peterschmidt3551]

The only reason we wouldn't have either is if we'd rather be cynical than move forward.

[@SavageBoinkShorts]

Check out the flying drone car prototypes

[@TML0677]

meanwhile... give us zillions of dollars!

[@pucmahone3893]

WOW! Quantum Pong! Can’t wait!

[@notdeaded1416]

The question is when you try to hit the blip, will the blip be there when you want to hit it?

[@pucmahone3893]

@ Only if you blink, will it not be there. Quantum entanglement takes over.

[@pucmahone3893]

@ Everybody looses!

[@6F6G]

And then quantum space invaders will be released.

[@pucmahone3893]

@ But you may never win when played in the double slit mode!

[@franks4973]

Thank you Anton, I am a computer engineer and have always struggled with quantum computing hipe. Great reality check.

[@peterschmidt3551]

It's not a reality check man, it's kinda ridiculous. No point was valid.

[@coreyleander7911]

@@peterschmidt3551agreed. That was a terrible video. Im surprised he was so wrong

[@the80hdgaming]

Proof that Doom runs on anything... 😂😂😂

[@karoshi2]

Well, our cat fought back ...

[@wolvenar]

sadly its only a recreation

[@charanko2971]

It really does.

[@jakethomas6123]

Looolll

[@ionpal9568]

Look, if only that pet bunny was left alone, we wouldn't be here.

[@Wordfishtrombone]

Quantum computing is one of those subjects I didn’t know I’d be interested in until I started watching you regularly

[@blijebij]

Making the internet hack-proof would be incredibly useful and necessary, especially with the advent of much faster photon chips in the near future. For instance, a hybrid photon quantum entangled system could potentially break codes we currently consider secure, as well as prevent third parties from intercepting your communications.

[@lost4468yt]

Quantum computing doesn't give arbitrary speed ups? We already have quantum resistant cryptography, we just haven't implemented it. Photonics doesn't help you beat it either, since the speedup is meaningless compared to the power needed.

[@GoogleAreEnemyCombatants]

So it will break encryption while also making encryption unnecessary . . . sounds like quantum mechanics alright.

[@sillyjellyfish2421]

Also, it's not like the encription will make the thing hackproof, more like it will be a proof of hacking. And sure, if detected, then you can just stop transmiting, but what's the point then? If you know that your signal from the point A to the point B has been disrupted by someone C listening in between, all this does is that you stop transmiting. Which you may think is good since that means that the C won't get that data, but also useless because B doesn't get them either. Then all it takes to sabotage this is some low effort low maintainance interference between A and B to permanently remove your ability to safely communicate, without actually damaging any of the infrastructure. To me it looks like a giant weakness if anything

[@ArnoldJudasRimmer..]

​@@GoogleAreEnemyCombatantsall at the same time also...with absolutely no process what so ever. 😂

[@silviavalentine3812]

In my quantum mechanics colloquium course back in 2014 we worked with qbit algorithm simulations.

[@gianpaulgraziosi6171]

Stuck in superposition!

[@blijebij]

Schrödinger's kat is doomed!

[@AndreasRavnestad]

What are you doing, step-baron?!

[@spvillano]

Been stuck in superposition many times, so many times have I been beside myself that I'm frequently assigned two man jobs alone.

[@JamesSarantidis]

Don't worry, mate. Superposition is not a stable state; you will decohere back into your normal state with the tiniest disturbance.

[@blijebij]

@@JamesSarantidis xD

[@robertfindley921]

History is replete with examples of popular belief that something was way, way in the future, only to have it happen far sooner. We need to keep pushing.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

Like?

[@nathan_luthor]

​@@Sonny_McMacsson planes in the 1900s

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

@@nathan_luthor Wouldn't say that's a good analog. It's on a completely different technical level and there were already functional examples of things flying in nature. Since there are supposedly many, try to give some more examples.

[@nathan_luthor]

​​​@@Sonny_McMacsson planes is a good analogy in the context of technology that no one confidently predict it would came fast even in the beginning 20th century Yes there were air balloons. But people at those times are mostly not optimistic when it comes mimicking flights like birds. Let alone cross transatlantic seas To quote from New York Times "Flying Machines Which Do Not Fly" in 1903: "[It] might be assumed that the flying machine which will really fly might be evolved by the combined and continuous efforts of mathematicians and mechanicians in from one million to ten million years... "

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

@@nathan_luthor My point is that's it's on a completely different level technically and you can't just extrapolate the future on previous outcomes, even if it were true. Throwing more money and time at something will more and more just consumer more money and time. There is no inevitable march of progress into the future. Things are going to slow down a lot. The fruit is higher and high up the tree. I don't care what some ignorant journalists say. They don't actually tend to understand much of anything. Please.

[@softerseltzer]

4:33 NISQ is more a collection of techniques than one single technique. It doesn't actually hope for some qubits to stay entangled out of many, it rather assumes that overall entanglement will stay at acceptable levels long enough for a useful computation to happen. NISQ techniques also delegate tasks that are easy for classical computers onto classical computers (like running Doom) and keeps the tasks which are easy for quantum computer (like preparing a highly entangled state of say, chemical compounds or materials, which need entanglement to be described accurately). NISQ is expected to produce useful results within the next 3 years, not as a substitute or speedup for classical computers, but as a very different way of doing computation of specific problems. Breaking RSA is not one of those problems, as Shor's algorithm assumes that qubits stay perfect forever (or for many-many orders of magnutude longer than what is currently possible).

[@coreyleander7911]

Wild to me how off base Anton was on most of what he said.

[@acd1235]

There is the more fundamental question whether an arbitrary number of q-bits can be entangled. There is no phenomen in nature where more the 60 quantum states are entangled. So there could be an upper limit that is way below the point of a useful quantum computer. When I asked a physisist colleague, he said, well that could be and the first who finds that limit will be invited to Stockholm.

[@Canthus13]

So... We're somewhere around 1985 in terms of classic computing.

[@vaikkajoku]

Not even close to that. I'd say somewhere before the invention of the integrated circuit.

[@Canthus13]

@vaikkajoku I was referring to the emularot, but yeah. Somewhere around the integrated logic gate era.

[@Blitnock]

More like Atanasov's work in the 1930s.

[@coreyleander7911]

Nope not even close

[@roookoooki3108]

Awesome and accurate video . Thank you for the the accuracy and the informations

[@peterschmidt3551]

It's not accurate, we're being sold baseless doubt. None of the points were both true and valid.

[@6F6G]

The graphics on the Doom simulation are comparable to graphics on late 70s/early 80s home computers. There have been a few improvements in the past 45 years.

[@michaeldamolsen]

Yes, but that is the point here. Quantum computing was invented in 1980, and there hasn't been many improvements in the last 45 years.

[@coreyleander7911]

⁠@@michaeldamolsenthat’s wrong lmao.

[@michaeldamolsen]

@@coreyleander7911 What is wrong with what I said? The only moderately successful quantum computers are the ones from D-wave and others (like google) which are running quantum annealing rather than actual quantum computing. Annealing, while useful for certain scenarios, can only perform a small subset of computations and are not Turing complete. The largest factorized integer was heavily pre-processed on classical computers in order to fit the problem into the still ridiculously small number of qubits available. Had those pre-processing steps been carried out on a quantum computer, it would have decohered long before producing any meaningful results. That is besides the point that they used annealing and not general purpose quantum computing. If I have missed any major milestones and achievements over the last 4 decades, feel free to let me know.

[@coreyleander7911]

@ so you’re saying you’ve been following two gate fidelity go from 50% to 99.9% in the past few years? We only need a few more nines. You need to read actual specialists in quantum computing, like Scott Aaronson. Check out his blog discussing two gate fidelities. They are the building block of quantum computers.

[@michaeldamolsen]

@@coreyleander7911 Dave Hayes from Quantinuum's 3-nines announcement last April: “Getting to three 9’s in the QCCD architecture means that ~1000 entangling operations can be done before an error occurs. Our quantum computers are right at the edge of being able to do computations at the physical level that are beyond the reach of classical computers, which would occur somewhere between 3 nines and 4 nines. Some tasks become hard for classical computers before this regime (e.g. Google’s random circuit sampling problem) but this new regime allows for much less contrived problems to be solved. At that point, these machines become real tools for new discoveries - albeit they will still be limited in what they can probe, likely to be physics simulations or closely related problems.” So they are right at the edge of being able to do less contrived problems which will still be limited in what they can probe. I've been following the development of quantum computing for a bit over 25 years. While I find it impressive how far the various technologies have been pushed, I am left with a sense that most of the journey still lies ahead in foggy and uncharted territory.

[@camronrubin8599]

Youd be surprised how much can change in 10-20 years .

[@doublebass1985]

oh well now we gotta see 20 Cyberdemon vs 250 Baron of hells

[@rwfrench66GenX]

As long as classical computer isn’t using Microsoft it should be ok for a few years.

[@marcoottina654]

Unix must be It's the only reliable and free way

[@vensroofcat6415]

MS-DOS means MicroSoft Disc Operating System. It's rather classical, don't you think? And it actually significantly accelerated general acceptance of computers and rapid development in the 80's making them unified. It was kind of copy-pasta recompile of already existing stuff, but that's a different story. Despite of what you think every society gets what it requires the most. And then came Google and Facebook and sold all your data overnight. Apple - premium design console. Linux - can't decide what they are up to. 25 years ago hyped as the future and free alternative. If chaos is the future. Server space - fine, managed by pros.

[@rwfrench66GenX]

⁠​⁠ you’re right, MS-DOS stands for Microsoft Disc Operating System. They bought it for $50,000 from some guy who is still kicking himself. Before DOS there was MSBASIC which again Microsoft didn’t invent. Xerox developed the mouse for their copy machines but gave away that technology because no one wanted to deal with a wire attached to the copy machines. Apple figured out how to integrate it into computers and I believe that helped make a quantum leap in the consumer market. When I was in school for my film and video engineering degree we had a Video Toaster computer that was running Unix and it saved memory by making every pixel black. Normally you have 8 bits to determine the color of a pixel but on that system you only needed 7 bits because if it was black it didn’t take up any memory. It doesn’t sound like much but it adds up when you’re transcoding and editing. MS has never been a leader. IBM were fools and gave them an exclusive contract for PC’s because they’re a hardware company and they didn’t see any value in software. If it wasn’t for that deal MS would’ve died back in the 80’s.

[@sn1000k]

​@@vensroofcat6415 Linux is great. Just because there's choices doesn't make it broken.

[@vensroofcat6415]

@@sn1000k Well the reality is around 2K many were saying Linux is The Future. Free, fast, secure. Didn't happen. Reality is you can't make free forever and IT guys love to create new pet projects just because they can. Dying to make it better than the other guy. Except hardly anybody needs it and no one will pay for that. See the real world issue?

[@richard520]

Quantum computers will be available just after Fusion power stations.

[@primoroy]

Yeah, just 10 years away!

[@radicallyrethinkingrailwaysina]

And you will get there in your flying driverless car. We can't even get rid of paper yet.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

LOL I just made this comment way above here. Add AGI to that.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

@@radicallyrethinkingrailwaysina You can't roll a blunt in bits, dude.

[@navret1707]

And warp drive.

[@CoolBossFights]

Oh Anton! Today after a little segway into quantum computers, I search the subject here only to find my favourite science youtuber uploading a video on the exact topic I wanted a day before. A testament to Nietszche's collective unconcious, or just 'spooky action at a distance'?. Perhaps we will never know, but what I do know is that I am ever grateful of your format of videos. Thank you, Wonderful Person!

[@Sparki116]

Interesting! Love how you display humor while staying totally serious.. I see the only advantage of early stage quantum computing to be evident when it comes to (deep) space communication. Mitigating the delay we have with standard communication methods.. what do you think

[@jeanmuller1000]

One small step for quantum, one giant leap for humanity😊

[@existenceisillusion6528]

Anyone who tells you 'classical computer will always be able to do anything a quantum computer can do, and do it better' doesn't know what they're talking about. Same goes for the other direction. The truth is, there are problems one can do that the other can't, there are some that both can do, but more importantly, there are some problems neither can do ... ever.

[@coreyleander7911]

This video pained me to listen to lol

[@arctic_haze]

So even a DOS-level graphics version of Doom is not yet possible on an actual quantum computer. Well, that says a lot.

[@Zorro33313]

well to make any meaningful and useful calculations you need an amount of qbits higher than you can theoretically preserve from decoherence. So yeah. Kinda expected and calculated tears ago.

[@norecordingsoftware3309]

@@Zorro33313 so that begs the question. What are they going to do with them? I understand it’s supposed to aid in researching by using quantum to calculate processes that use quantum or are in nature.

[@MJ-revered]

You sound a bit muted in this video Anton.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

iT'S In It'S InFaNcy!

[@null2470]

I see everyone here watched one video on the the quantum computing "bubble" and thinks they're a clairvoyant computer physicist now.

[@while_coyote]

I bet quantum computers will run LLMs REALLY well someday.

[@spvillano]

Oh joy, can get all possible permutations of confabulation!

[@tommylakindasorta3068]

@@spvillano They'll be able to hallucinate in up to 10 dimensions!

[@MCsCreations]

The issue is that we don't know enough about the behavior of the small stuff to use those phenomena reliably. (I'm not saying that what we know is wrong, just that it's not enough.) But, at the same time, if we don't try it... We're probably not going to learn much either.

[@jimcurtis9052]

Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 🙂⭐️✌️☺️

[@peterschmidt3551]

This one was baseless unfortunately, but I love the guy too.

[@TheSleepLes]

F quantum computers. Where is my flying car, thermonuclear power station, house on Mars and AI-robot working in its kitchen?

[@TheRogueWolf]

People are too stupid to drive safely in two dimensions. You want to add a third one?

[@TheSleepLes]

@ Agreed. However, it would decrease traffic significantly. By hook or crook.

[@Zorro33313]

The only purpose of all these "projects" is to embezzle money.

[@nilo70]

Where the hell is my jet pack ???

[@hibbs1712]

Where's my freaking pokemon???!!!!

[@bigboy4006]

I hope this optical quantum computer using a single photon is the breakthrough we need for future quantum computers!

[@stevenverrall4527]

I earned my PhD in optical computing 25 years ago. Little has changed in the field. I have since retired from academia to work in R&D manufacturing, which is now growing rapidly in the US.

[@mitsidstevgttab2677]

The fact that they know how to get there is amazing! In the beginning they only knew how to make it calculated one single thing.

[@markusmencke8059]

IIRC there were a few discoveries in encryption theories that may lead to truly unhackable encryption systems - even for quantum computers.

[@peterschmidt3551]

But, how else are you going to have any clue if that is true without quantum hackers trying to prove otherwise? You need team quantum to establish the cat-and-mouse dynamic.

[@markusmencke8059]

@ not really - because quantum computer capabilities in this field are pretty much all known. If a encryption key set can be generated as a „truly“ random number (not a set of factorials of prime numbers), then there is no approach to find the keys. Look up „Einstein Tiles“ - that seems to be the basis for this approach. It may - may! - work simply because the approach is purely quantum (and therefore, random) in itself.

[@arthurcamargo8416]

I do wonder if there are practical applications for space exploration? For example, putting a quantum computer on a satellite, sending it to Proxima or some other star, and having it "communicate" with another here on Earth? Is it not the case that no matter how far away the computer on the satellite gets, you can have practical communication with it (thanks to "spooky action at a distance") through a quantum channel? It is something that was going to happen when quantum computing was first announced.

[@tommylakindasorta3068]

Unfortunately, using entanglement to communicate like that would break the laws of physics. We don't think it's possible to send information faster than the speed of light, regardless of the method. All you would get from the entangled particles is knowledge of their entangled partners' states, in random combinations.

[@stancil83]

A 'foolproof security system,' much like an 'unsinkable ship,' has always seemed like an oxymoron to me. To quote Dr. Malcolm: 'Life finds a way.'

[@PlanetDeLaTourette]

Doom is built on the raycasting principle. A clever "hack" to get something done with little resources. Drawing a space with 3D vectors is much more demanding. A serious 16 bit machine, back in the day, could not do much more in terms of real 3D. Unless one had a specialized computer, the price of an exclusive car. After 1995 3D works because of investment in hardware acceleration to do the math. Difficult to compare these things.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

What is the ray tracing principle? I know what ray tracing is.

[@PlanetDeLaTourette]

@@Sonny_McMacsson Raycasting. My bad. Pseudo 3D.

[@Walrus-xf3xg]

Fun fact I had the record for a 9 second 1st level doom run. Idk if I still do :D

[@franciscobermejo1779]

9 seconds?? 😮😮👏👏👏

[@Walrus-xf3xg]

@ Yeah I spent 6 months on it, 13 seconds in the first month, 11 in the next few, 10 for the majority, then 0:09. I haven’t thought about this record in a long time lol. Thanks for understanding what I was trying to say

[@gabedude68]

Great as always, Anton! If useful quantum computers are possible, it may disprove "Simulation Theory" once and for all because you couldn't simulate a potentially infinitely powerful computer. It may also unlock the way human minds and consciousness work, so its a very very big deal, not just whether they can break RSA encryption one day.

[@My-Pal-Hal]

Cool. We've Advanced All The Way To Black And White !!! ... glad i kept that tv 😏

[@CaliforniaBushman]

I played the Original Atari Pong on Christmas 1976 - First Retail Atari Video games available to the public. Played all the Atari games through 1982 when we got a PC Junior. Then the Original Castle Wolfenstein's. Then the second version of Doom in 1993. Then Quake 1, 2, & 3 in the late 90's and got really good. Then grew out of being an addicted gamer.

[@dislikeas]

Quake on quantum computer simply makes no sense because it is classical problem being solved on wrong hardware. Quantum computing is best for problems directly or indirectly related to fourier transform + a few less impressive algorithms.

[@skoitch]

Reminds me of Dungeons of Daggorath on the TRS-80

[@-nok]

Really appreciated the doom and gloom pun, golden

[@davefoc]

I expected the game decision making to be done with the simulated quantum computer and the graphics to be done by a classical computer.

[@ruperterskin2117]

Cool. Thanks for sharing.

[@wrayday7149]

I can relate... I keep buying CPU's with more cores and all software developers do is make code that runs on a single core which leaves my processor just wasting it's potential.

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

On mainframes like the IBM z16 (which has an 8-core CPU) use the cores for (simultaneous) multiprocessing. Computers use to have a single central processor. It could handle several applications "concurrently." Getting more than one processor to work simultaneously with others was very difficult.

[@bensplace]

I had a drink with the lead designer of IBMs quantum computer about 6 or 7 years ago at a conference in Florida. He told me that when they get close to 100 qubits it will seem like magic. Able to do things such as predict the weather and tell which way a hurricane is going to turn.

[@johnmanderson2060]

Schrödinger’s Qbit is out of the box 📦! I must say, the cat 🐈 was a great analogy, they are unpredictable, in moment friendly and suddenly they « byte » you! 😉

[@cestparti7577]

Anton, please list the name of the music you use on your outro ! ❤

[@john-or9cf]

The first “computer” I ever worked on was an IBM 1620 a looong time ago so I’ve been around the block more times I can count…I have yet to figure out what the hell a “quantum” computer really is or does…much less how to program the damned things!

[@hywelgriffiths5747]

The best introductory book i've seen is Mermin's Quantum Computer Science. It's very accessible if you know some linear algebra

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

My high-school had an IBM 1620. On Saturdays the school district let us use their IBM 1401 with tape drives, 1403 line-printer, 1311 disk-drives, etc. Learned a lot and had a great time. Even won the San Francisco Bay Area Science Fair's 1st prize in Comp-Sci in 1972. (It's sad that kids today don't get real hands-on experience with hardware, assembler & machine language coding, etc.)

[@john-or9cf]

@ 👍 By the 70’s I had moved “up” to a Xerox Sigma 5, a “massive” 5mb RAD - hard drive with 512 heads floating on a cushion of air. Paper tape reader, teletype, card reader, chain line printer…and this was at a defense contractor. Before the RAD started turning, compressed air lifted the heads off the 2 foot diameter disk - one day, the compressor failed - end of disk - and I got to rebuild the OS from punch cards when we finally got a new disk installed - took a full 19” rack also. Lots of lights flashing on the front panel…Ah, fun times…

[@garanceadrosehn9691]

Certainly programming it requires a different approach in thinking, and it will never be good for many tasks that current computers can do quite well. I've been programing non-quantum computers for so many decades that I'm not sure I can wrap my head around the right way to design algorithms on a quantum computer!

[@john-or9cf]

@ Sam’s here. My first impression was like wiring an analog computer to do a specific task.

[@brandonpiatt5625]

I’m really really trying to understand the small optical quantum computer.. they stored the information on the photon beam? Is this similar in concept to a record containing sound data along grooves? Is this like an optical groove containing information? Please excuse me for if I got this painfully ,painfully wrong. Me no smart. Me big dumb.

[@catserver8577]

I'm going to go even further and say it never left whatever comes before limbo.

[@nickwilson589]

Wow it's like quantum computing is going through the same evolution as computers did

[@Internet_user777]

I love your channel!!!

[@Ygdkli]

Brings back memories of virtual boy. That thing was so cool in 1996. Now, not so much.

[@mscir]

Please do a video on how the algorithms were made so much faster.

[@ZER0--]

I recently watch a video about quantum computers and that they don't actually run any programs. It also said many scientist believe it can't be scaled up because of it becoming unstable. In other words it seems that it's not viable, but because so much has been invested people are reluctant to admit the fact it's not viable.

[@evanta]

My brain failed when it said "add more dimensions". How do you do that? Is that proof of higher dimensions or the definition of "dimensions" is different?

[@marcoottina654]

I don't actually know the precise answer, but it should be (as far as I know) related with encoding data over many properties of light, like phase and chirality/polarization, rather than "just" different wavelengths.

[@axle.student]

@@marcoottina654 I know you can use a light wave as a carrier wave the same as any analog radio, but I don't know how much data you can fit in a single wave packet.

[@marknovak6498]

I remember years ago in the mid 1980s, galium arsenide chips were the future of computing.

[@insubordinategoy7466]

Quantum computing is only useful at specific tasks its not going to replace regular computers. They allow computer to access new algorithms that allow very specific calculations much faster.

[@franks4973]

Thank you An

[@ChristianKunzer]

What happend to the Molecule clustering done at the late 80th done with gallium arsenid molecules published by the ibm research labors ?

[@Richard-gl7xu]

The problem with a QM computer is that as soon as you open it up and look at the qubits, the wave function collapses superposition and it ceases to function...

[@thehat4244]

Hello wonderful Anton! This is person.

[@brandonpiatt5625]

Please excuse me if I got this painfully, painfully wrong. Me no smart. Me big dumb. I’m really really trying to understand the small optical quantum computer.. they stored the information on the photon beam? Is this similar in concept to a record containing sound data along grooves? Is this like an optical groove containing information? Also, what exactly is the point of a quantum computer? Like what is theoretically achievable with a quantum computer that can’t be with classical computers?

[@RSLT]

RSA-2048 is likely safe for now, but quantum computing could break it in the next 25-50 years or more, depending on advancements in quantum technology. Post-quantum cryptography is being developed as a precaution to safeguard against quantum threats in the future.

[@HectorDiabolucus]

One use case might be long distance communication, like with spacecraft.

[@Yea_I_Got_Nothing]

Quantum computers. The Edsel of technology ?

[@MatrixVectorPSI]

The power of the static matrix in quantum memory is stronger than people realize. As you can hold the state of every object in the universe with 100 qbits, as quantum memory holds 2^N positions per Q-bit. The bottleneck is in the input/output of the matrix to classic observation. Its actually quite impressive that they have a working matrix in real time, as whats measured is always a small part of the quantum matrix.

[@peterlaurie1247]

So can a quantum computer hold the state of every other quantum computer, or does it just disappear up its own ...

[@joemurray8902]

Step 1: Create infinite powerful Quantum Compy. Step 2: Solve fusion. Step 3: Jet packs.

[@danieljamesbinderystu2968]

We already have jet packs lol. The military and private market has had them for a few years now. Each year, it has been getting lighter and smaller. Look up videos on yt. They got military people landing on aircraft carriers with a jet pack. They are also available in the private sector too.

[@ericpode6095]

​@@danieljamesbinderystu2968the compact engines are also used in drones.

[@danieljamesbinderystu2968]

@@ericpode6095 yup, forgot to mention that. Lol

[@joemurray8902]

@@danieljamesbinderystu2968 Oh c'mon! They're not the jet packs everybody wants and you know it!

[@leonmusk1040]

Anyone know what happened to the fft gate parallel transfer system that was supposed to be the way forward in quantum networking looked like it might be the first end user application for quantum processing but went dark about two years ago. Was curious if it was a dead end or if it just got military licensed and we won't hear about it again until it's several gens old?

[@Zoe-c9z]

I could not joke about this, if you did not explain it so well petrov don't say you did not warn us. I believe the security aspect is the best application, if someone that loves to exploit things would make it work for usefulness

[@yvonnemiezis5199]

Now l know something, thanks Anton👍❤😃

[@ldmtag]

In distant future I see quantum computers being used as a flex by some manufacturers like how Apple used RISC processors in their MacBooks just to be different, and later quantum computers will develop into a very popular but very specific niche, just like we now have ARM.

[@justinpyle3415]

Quantum cryptography is going to be big for governments, thats why there is such a huge push.

[@stancil83]

9:10 This is where you lost me. Forgive me, I'm not a big brain. In geometry, an "extra dimension" refers to a spatial or temporal dimension beyond the three spatial dimensions (length, width, and height) that we experience daily, and often beyond time as the fourth dimension in spacetime models. An extra dimension is conceptualized as an additional direction in which an object or particle can move or extend, beyond the typical three-dimensional space. So does this mean we became like the aliens in the series 'Three Body Problem?'

[@powerdude_dk]

When taking about dimensions in math, think about a big data table that not only has rows and columns, but also extra cells in other directions. Not spatially, just to make room for more information. So instead of 2D array: [x,y] It could be a 10D array: [a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j] And to make matters more complicated; All data cells connect to each other. And that's actually similar to how neural networks work 👌 and when AI programmers are referring to "parameters". They're really talking about dimensions.

[@justincastro8964]

And there it is… If there’s nothing mathematically unique quantum computers can do specifically, there’s no reason to use them. Hypothetically speaking if they could crunch huge floating point numbers at blistering speed, they could be implemented along side classical systems. That’s probably the only way it will work. You would have a dedicated quantum chip alongside your cpu, gpu, ram, and io.

[@XxxThePsyCheMisTxxX]

Unlike classical computers, most quantum computer processors require cryogenic cooling. Only optical quantum computers are free of this requirement, and thus have potential widespread use baked into the construction materials. Photolithography developed for classical computing could presumably be leveraged here. In other words, ignore cryo-cooled devices and pay close attention to the optical quantum space. Single-chip hybrid optical-quantum/classical designs will eventually win out on cost and adaptability alone.

[@vensroofcat6415]

We may have to rewrite a lot of Sci-Fi books. Quantum computing has a bunch of problems. And AI overlords may not happen either. AI needs to grow a lot, but the space to grow is rather limited by now. Interstellar human space travel? Forget it. So what's left?

[@marcoottina654]

Rook's Basilisk? No seriously, we might just be able to do genetic engineering, put ourselves in hibernation - alike and seed other worlds over thousands of years, if not millions. We don't know how to properly bend, puncture or even re-stitch the Spacetime continuum, assuming it will be possible, so we might get stuck to the lightspeed limit and its implications

[@jajupa78]

Interdimensional travel. Warp drives. Time travel(to the future). Teleportation. First contact...

[@RobzdaBlade]

@@jajupa78 UP3 act in reality? One can only dream about such wonders.

[@vensroofcat6415]

@@jajupa78 we do time travel to the future. Just very slowly 🤣 And backwards is incompatible with causality. Teleportation - must still be slower than the speed of light. First contact to what? Aliens can't reasonably go between the stars either. Same universe, same physics for them. Would you spend your whole life traveling in a steel can just to see some stupid ape? Would more intelligent life do so? Warp - unstable, stellar amounts of energy wasted to again - see some stupid ape elsewhere. Who will pay for that? You don't gather resources consuming stars. Interdimensional - another word for warp?

[@vensroofcat6415]

@@marcoottina654 This is where another problem starts. People on other planets won't be us. They will evolve differently. And since we have 200 countries on Earth alone, I can't promise you they will like us in 100 years. The whole occupy galaxy idea is rather shortsighted lazy thinking. There's 0 value for "us" being elsewhere. Because it's not us! If you are looking to populate other planets the most intelligent way would be using simple organisms with fast life cycles/adaptation. So the life can evolve there on its own. Which again - won't be us.

[@stevenkarnisky411]

I do not understand "classical" computers. I have only the faintest inkling of quantum. And I thought a cubit is about the distance from elbow to extended middle finger. Thanks, anyway, Anton. I will use them if they come with instructions!

[@stancil83]

This only has me worried about the potential future of computers. They are so eager to jump on this. Kind of like how they're all jumping on ARM Computers for the potential power savings. It's a good idea, but it's always been there. It's not until now that they're making the jump. Are we starting to see demission returns in Moore's Law.

[@mnoxman]

Actually that looks a lot closer to a game I played on my ZX81 and another on the COCO (Dungeons of Daggorath).

[@garretteckhart8079]

Thank you.

[@IgorEngelen1974]

What we need is something like VMWare or VirtualBox for quantum computers 🙂

[@seantiz]

We need a quantum computer to design a quantum computer.

[@blijebij]

xD

[@DougieJohnson-l5w]

I WANNA PLAY THE ORIGINAL DOOM!

[@axle.student]

It was originally created on NeXT computers (In house university) But the first public releases were on DOS. It was a color game, so no black and white version like above that I have seen. Widows 95 will run most versions reasonably well :) > They do make NeXT emulators but I doubt it would be much different from the DOS version. They also offer the first DOS versions for online play :)

[@bradleyp3655]

I still think photonic based computers are the future.

[@norecordingsoftware3309]

Light based computers?

[@marcoottina654]

From lightning to just straight light Interesting Actually, it might be the very next or even final step. Probably, the one able to achieve the maximum velocity possible

[@MGarafano]

I feel like that’s not an appropriate comparison, yes it requires a lot of power to do something it’s not designed to do, but how much power does it require to do what it is designed to do… The moment it’s able to provide a real contribution to anything it’s going to change the field in which it’s working and that is likely to come far sooner then video games designed to run on entirely different hardware let alone physics…

[@Dragon6687]

I'm surprise Anton didn't do a video about the first triple binary black hole system ever found.

[@kinngrimm]

In a way i am not mad that we do not have currently a way to advance this tech quickly, equally to LLMs not being the be all end all to AIs. I guess we still be getting these before we as a species are ready for them.

[@ChrisJohnson-gx8yo]

Great Work!

[@axle.student]

0:40 I recently downloaded QASM and a few other emulators to have a go at learning to write quantum programs. The learning curve is pretty high and on a whole different paradigm to binary programming so I'm a bit Yeah/Nah at the moment lol 0:45 What! What is 80 million Gigs? 72K bits is about 9KiB equivalent, so what is this 80 million Gigs? 6 GiB of RAM is OK, but feels a bit heavy for a 9KiB application. That' one RAM hungry emulator lol > 3:07 I am actually looking for usage cases with fast algorithms using Polynomial functions. Sort of an area I need to study. > Conclusion: I will take my analog-digital over the quantum-digital computer. At least the former works and I can code on it lol

[@oker59]

you've missed a whole bunch alright - Quantum Computers by March(or maybe April) of next year. I'm tempted to say with the plethora of quantum error correction techniques that came out . . . about a month ago now . . . the first general programmable Quantum Computer will be here even earlier than that! This'll be about a 10,000 qubit Quantum Computer "prototype" but a Quantum Computer never the less. Some Quantum Computer researchers swear by having millions of qubits to make a working Quantum Computer but that's only with low quality qubits. There's high quality qubits. And what I'm talking about is a topological Qubit Quantum Computer.

[@glike2]

So this code could run on a smartwatch?

[@blackmennewstyle]

They actually managed to run DOOM on a router if am not mistaken 👽

[@conorstevenson6856]

How can a wave packet be a single photon? Photons being a quantum of electromagnetic energy, a wave packet is a superposition of plane waves so many photons, I think? If so makes more sense why more than one qubit can be encoded in a wave packet

[@RahulGupta-cn2hh]

We are limited by current technology, wait a few decades and we will have many breakthroughs in multiple fields! By combing these we will have our fully functional quantum computer.

[@primoroy]

What is that rotating thingy with the lightning in the middle that is in many of your videos? I can't find it in Google!

[@norecordingsoftware3309]

Take a screenshot and feed it to Google lens, it’ll give u info based on a image

[@primoroy]

@@norecordingsoftware3309 I've done it twice with two different screen shots, it just gives me more variations without a description.

[@primoroy]

@norecordingsoftware3309 I have, twice, using 2 different screen shots, all I get is more copies, but no info.

[@joeshmoe7485]

quantum computing is over hyped. we are nowhere near having a useful quantum computer. the main issue is needing to keep the qbits near absolute zero. practically takes a nuclear power plant to run one.

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

We could do that...if liberal democratic states were capable of long term planning. Crime costs the US trillions every year, so it would be a fraction of that

[@dustinb1070]

How about one in space kept in the shade in orbit around the earth?

[@coreyleander7911]

It doesn’t take a nuclear plant to run one. Lmao. Nor is it over hyped. Two gate fidelity is getting near what we need it to be. You should read what actual quantum computing scientists write, like Scott Aaronson. He has a blog about the recent advancements.

[@coreyleander7911]

@@TheThreatenedSwancrime costs the US trillions per year? How could you believe something so obviously false on its face? Lmao

[@DavidDavrosWhite]

As a kid we had a bbc micro with 32k RAM, now we have watches with more computing power than it.