The Quantum Computing Collapse Has Begun

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Just after we finished this video, news broke that the quantum computing startup Zapata ceased operation: quantumcomputingreport.com/zapata-ai-ceases-operations/

[@TheSprinkler]

jeez you're on it quicker than maple syrup on pancakes

[@KylesCutePecker]

I don't think, we have the most promising ideas, or enough diversity in ideas, outside the main ideas.

[@PunmasterSTP]

So they got Zap-ped...

[@DavidElstob73]

Quantum algorithms take partial measurements labelled as 1 guess and IBM fail to mention this in their card game demo.

[@traviscecil3903]

So...quantum computing is promising until someone makes an observation of a start-up's financial state and then it all collapses.

[@georgejones3526]

Maybe if people hadn’t looked at quantum computing it wouldn’t have collapsed.

[@davez5201]

I see what you did there XD

[@BryBry78]

It wasn't me.

[@acters124]

Yeah, it could have been in a super position of both collapsing and going to the moon

[@devschlong]

Lol

[@Douglasm101]

Are you sure about that?

[@TheNorgesOption]

Quantum computing will become financially feasible right after nuclear fusion becomes profitable in about 21 years or so.

[@mermadone6465]

Umm, no, see IONQ

[@thomaslink2685]

Fusion? Just 30 years away!

[@DudeManDude-ot5fv]

You're so wrong my text book from the 1970s says fusion is only 15 years away.

[@NJ-wb1cz]

It doesn't need to be financially feasible. There are many exobytes (that's millions of terabytes) of traffic being saved right now in huge datacenters, which includes your traffic, only waiting until they can be easily cracked and all our data and actions decrypted and recorded. Your conversations, banking info, searches, þorn preferences, health and fitness data, you name it. All waiting its time of day to be fully accessible. There is no profit in this only because because this information is priceless

[@Tathanic]

@@thomaslink2685 Correct It is 30 years not this 21 year nonsense!

[@gameboardgames]

Did you hear the one about the quantum computer IT support guy? Whenever you called in for help, he always said 'Have you tried turning it on and off again at the same time?'

[@asimbliskovac9720]

Schrodinger's cat is gonna do it for them. Dead or alive. 🙀

[@alanserjeant4947]

Now THAT brings back a few memories ! 🙂

[@mamneo2]

Incroyable.

[@emilala9049]

Quantum computing super position.

[@miguelarivera]

He’s the worst bunch of dumb options, turn on then off or off then on or turn on and off that the same time, wtf at the same time! 😳

[@Sayantanintime]

Hi Sabine, computer scientist here who's worked on this stuff. While I agree with you that a lot of caution and a lot less hype is the need of the hour, I would like to highlight that quantum information science in general isn't just quantum computing. QC has a far less famous yet far more successful cousin, quantum communication and metrology, which has seen feasible and practical applications many times over. The BB84 protocol is a great example. While it pains me to see all funding go towards building a QC, with every Tom, Dick and Harry trying to get on the gravy train, maybe you could consider talking about the other more successful aspects of this area of research?

[@jost2741]

All quantum imitation, no computing?

[@randyscorner9434]

You may be right here, but who is working on quantum-enabled communications? I'll look up BB84 but would appreciate any other pointers to interesting uses.

[@cybervigilante]

Quantum Communication? Great! We can finally talk with aliens!

[@ef2b]

I'm a physicist, so I'll say I understand quantum at least a little bit. My problem is that I have never felt that I truly understood what it would mean to do a quantum calculation or have a "quantum program" or, similarly, to list what types of problems are amenable to quantum computation. Admittedly, I've put close to no effort into this, but when I've bumped into people and asked them to explain it to me, I've never gotten an answer. Another way to say this is that I have no sense of far the gap is between what people can do today and what is needed to do something useful. This is all background to ask if you can point me to something brief to read that will help me understand these questions? Do you know of anything? Some sort of QC primer for someone who knows QM already and wants to answer the questions I just posed (or be redirected constructively if those are gibberish questions).

[@ef2b]

@aidancollins1591 Thank you. These sound like excellent resources. I'll have a look. I've had people wave their hands and say things like qubits moving through gates is really superpositions moving through gates which is like parallel processing, but I've never understood how that hand waving turns into a real calculation, how the multiplicity gets high enough to matter, and a multitude of other questions. I'll go have a look at the things you mentioned. Sorry if I just typed gibberish.

[@mennovanlavieren3885]

Years and years ago, I was asking questions about how quantum computing could ever deliver a viable product if for adding more qubits the operating temperature must drop significantly. It seemed like an exponentially difficult problem. I was told that I didn't understood it properly. Maybe I don't, but I got the smell right.

[@newworldforward1842]

Temperature is near absolute zero. But the requirements on the environment to not interfere is insane.... This technology(if you may call it that) is a new field in physics where there are far more questions than answers at the moment.

[@TheTwober]

The only problem with Quantum Computing are the investors that somehow constantly fall for the random startup, that promises random BS if you just give them a few million of moneys. Those startups love to make a lot of noise to get that money, and the average journalist then blindly copies that noise to turn it into a headline, that then forces Sabine to make a new video about why that was total BS.

[@glimpsepandey3174]

That's the magic of the Citadel led US economy where hype farming for immediate profit is the only goal. Similar to AI, where it's a few companies among millions doing the innovation, rest are getting massive funding to publish ChatGPT wrappers and to hire AI consultants from Mckinsey. European market seems less inclined to do it, but investors are having a FOMO missing out on the hype money and are trying to convince people that this results in less innovation. Happened with crypto, happening with AI, will happen with Quantum computing when you'll see LinkedIn finance bros pretending to understand what superposition is.

[@bishopdredd5349]

Andretti (motorracing) fell for it, it has costed him the ownership of his own company.

[@EbenBransome]

Thing is, with current interest rates, if you have billions under management throwing a few million at blue sky is more rational than spread betting on horse races, since there is at least a chance one blue sky project either comes good, or the share price goes up due to irrational exuberance and you get out with a profit. People are making money on shares like Trump Media by paying close attention to the election polls, even though eventually it will trade below $1.

[@kennethrcasey]

When I saw today's subject, I remarked to my wife, "Sabine called it!"

[@busybillyb33]

Investors pay top dollars for Powerpoint presentations. So better brush your PP skills.

[@KipPiper1]

Quantim computing investor pitch meetings must be like physics panels where Dr. Michio Kaku talks about all the "evidence" for string theory coming out "every day." Reminds me of used car salesmen, but without the keen fashion sense.

[@forcivilizaton5021]

That’s because Dr. Kaku worked many many years behind writing string theory and you never give up your vested interest even if you’re wrong in the Academics world. Just look at Archeology, evidence for humans in N. America over 300,000 years ago and Universities are fuming 😡 over losing their funding from Ten Year PhD’s who spent their life trying to convince you people came to the Americas only since 10,000 years ago. Dogma.

[@jaredf6205]

Sabine isn't much better than Kaku when it comes to that stuff

[@CarlosSpicyWang]

​@jaredf6205 These are all people who would have said that combustion engines wouldn't go anywhere when they were invented. Given time, almost every scientist is proven to be extremely biased or incompetent.

[@Naptosis]

​@@CarlosSpicyWang​This is the complete opposite of reality. Scientists do research, peer review other's work, and try and falsify their own. It's the ignorant like yourself that discount research performed by more capable minds - like the research that went into the combustion engine.

[@stevebuckley7788]

It's where all the guys from Enron ended up.

[@raymitchell9736]

The Money-Wave function collapses when Quantum Computers becomes entangled with reality... Even with error correcting being taken into consideration.

[@levilukeskytrekker]

+

[@Galahad54]

I think when they get error correction, they'll close shop. Daisy, Daisy.

[@artcurious807]

AI will follow this quantum hype train derail

[@brucelin8950]

lmao

[@georgesheffield1580]

🥰🤑🫡🤔🫣🙈🙉🙊💥💥💥🤓🙃🙃🙃

[@propylaeen]

Expensive refrigerators with a badly functioning calculator attached.

[@dylancato6187]

Lol

[@newworldforward1842]

At least it sounds cool

[@HakaiKaien]

Quantum computing was a juvenile dream anyway

[@marksfolly123]

Not even a calculator TBH, a random number generating machine masquerading as a calculator

[@warren3174]

Refrigeration was really something when it was a candle and ammonia

[@perrybrown4985]

My guess is that the big companies aren't really interested in quantum computing, they are just interested in ensuring that they get there before any of their competitors. They only need to put enough money/effort into the problem to determine how hard the problem is. Once they know how much the other guy will need to commit, they know how much they can safely back off their investment. We are now entering this phase...

[@davechapman6609]

Similar comments for the various National Intelligence Agencies.

[@CopperCooper420]

Meanwhile millions starve and US veterans are sleeping under a bridge somewhere. Great society we have here.

[@jamestucker8088]

FOMO

[@Xull042]

So true. At the same time, anyone just need 1 genius to solve a problem no other has to just go over the problem and succeed. Science and results are a weird thing.

[@nzoomed]

Meanwhile China is still marching along with their quantum efforts.

[@cKerensky]

I used to work for IBM. Can confirm, they gave up years ago, almost across the board. We joked our division was bankrolling the rest of IBMs pet projects, this included, since we were very profitable at the time. I left, but not long after layoffs hit that division to keep their pie in the sky projects running. Lots of good people out of work for huff and puff investors

[@bdcopp]

Ive just been offered a role at IBM, can you tell me abit about what to expect?

[@GoDodgers1]

@@bdcopp Nice, warm, soft deliciousness.

[@timseguine2]

@@bdcopp Depends heavily on what department. Generally colleagues are nice to work with and knowledgeable especially at R&D campuses. Management is a mixed bag but fine as far as large companies go.

[@SahilP2648]

​@@bdcopp what is your field of expertise or profession?

[@devilsolution9781]

What did you do there? photonics seem better

[@actualBIAS]

I do my Masters Degree in QUantum Computing and it's complicated. Not the field itself. The stabilizing part. If you are inside a saltmine 3km below the surface of the earth, you get astonishing results and low error. But as long as freaking backgroundradiation can cause decoherence we have problems with the "quantumness" of our qubits.

[@andregomes2476]

I am thinking of doing my masters next year in Quantum computing and quantum information because it seems interesting but I'm afraid if it is the best option because I do not intend to pursue a PhD and the industry for it seems to be small, very risky and competitive. What is you experience in the master's degree?

[@NJ-wb1cz]

@@actualBIAS so what's the problem? Sit in that salt mine

[@WestOfEarth]

So the background radiation is essentially an 'observer' or 'measurement' that collapses the waveform?

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

@@andregomes2476 But isn't quantum metrology a thriving field? And aren't the knowledge/skills transferable?

[@BB-sm8ey]

If they're so useful, then why aren't salt mines simply where quantum supercomputers are located?

[@michaelleue7594]

The frontiers of the field aren't where they were even just a couple years ago. I really don't expect anything to fall apart, unless some external pressure forces it to. Getting a commercially viable product isn't an immediate goal, and never has been, so any change isn't likely to be based on the outlook of such.

[@MusicAndParkour]

As a healthy dose of scepticism is good I would like to see her diss the new 54M contract IonQ has signed with the United States Airforce Research Lab, ironically IonQ hit an all-time high a month after the predicted collapse, seems like no one was looking at the stock lmao.

[@jamesofdiamonds4389]

they ignored it

[@like2watchYou]

If you dont have time, here is some summary: (<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="0">00:00</a>) The speaker predicted the hype around quantum computing would peak and falter in 2024, but now believes the situation will remain uncertain. (<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="23">00:23</a>) IBM presented a 1000+ qubit quantum chip with little performance details and quietly revised their ambitious roadmap to focus on error correction. (<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="92">01:32</a>) Quantum computing firms D-wave and Rigetti face delisting from the NY stock exchange due to low stock prices, while PsiQuantum raises funds and faces scrutiny. (<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="140">02:20</a>) Google made progress in error correction, demonstrating that increasing qubits can exponentially reduce errors, which is good news for IBM as well. (<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="268">04:28</a>) The speaker estimates that building a commercially useful quantum computer could cost up to $100 billion, making further investments risky for big companies and startups.

[@alanserjeant4947]

As soon as it gets as up to as high as $100 Billion they will foist it on to taxpayers. Trust me, I'm from the gubmint.

[@santerisatama5409]

@@alanserjeant4947 Easier and more simple to build a quantum printer of quantum money. Why do physicists, engineers and mathematicians start from the premisse of systemic corruption to a financial system based mathematically on a mathematically absurd Ponzi algorithm?

[@kenwallace6493]

Years ago IBM embraced "financial capitalism" and proceeded to shut down R&D, product development, and manufacturing plants. They are now a husk of their former selves. I used to work there but cannot tell you what they do these days (cloud solutions???). It's a sad tale but typical of many former kings of industry.

[@PaulaXism]

I have been wondering what IBM actually do these days.. They don't seem to make anything.

[@brionfranks478]

In high school I was in the Explorers Club and went to our weekly meetings at the huge RCA building . 50 years later and RCA is just dust in the wind...

[@ralfmimoun2826]

​@@PaulaXism Right. They are consultants right now, so actual results would be inconvenient.

[@shazzz_land]

​@@PaulaXism Military project are not publicly discussed

[@TheDuckofDoom.]

@@PaulaXism They still ride on leasing mainframes. And yes there is still a market for them, they have some advantages over racks of commodity servers.

[@bodhidharmafpv1971]

One factor overlooked about investment is the government(s) this has encryption/decryption potential and thus is a national security issue. It's kind of like nuclear research was post WW2 that came with massive physics funding. The US government (NSA) has a very large black budget and lots of cash to spread around for R&D, so does China.

[@ikrenji8125]

yeah, if anyone is going to build a QC its going to be NSA

[@user-ei3qr9un9x]

Obviously not, but they would be fed information from the newfound lack of security ​@@ikrenji8125

[@meatskunk]

Can’t they just call the errors “hallucinations” and sweep them under the rug? 😝

[@levilukeskytrekker]

+

[@TiagoNateldeMoura]

This is called "misfortunes" in quantum computing world.

[@Darth_Bateman]

@@TiagoNateldeMouraThat’s stupid, they should call it “Calamity” quotes included.

[@IIIRONE]

Ai joke detected

[@SaHaRaSquad]

spooky bitflips at low distance

[@alsto8298]

It is truly fascinating how people talking about things they do not understand. Also making quite correct conclusions on false inputs. Seek information of source to that problems, requiring error correction and you will understand why more is indeed better and also why it will change nothing in general.

[@andraslibal]

I am a Physicist and I talked to really highly regarded people actually doing quantum computing (they have a d wave machine) and my understanding is that setting it up takes a long long time and it will never be a general use computer but there is still funding in it. I think if it will be able to o one thing and one thing only, breaking encrypting it is already worth it for the (US) government.

[@johnwollenbecker1500]

Race for relevance between string theory and quantum computing. Shall be fun watching from the sidelines.

[@yeroca]

Well at least we do have quantum computers that work. We don't have strings that match reality, afaik.

[@anttikangasvieri1361]

​@@yerocamaybe we can simulate string in quantum computer 😅

[@syntaxusdogmata3333]

And here I am, struggling to figure out why my lawn mower won't start.

[@perorenchino2036]

@@syntaxusdogmata3333 Because your dog uses it.

[@user-pi4qo3zc2e]

I'd throw the so-called "hot-carrier solar cells" into the mix, but thankfully those have not become a mainstream topic. They just remain a bane in my research corner, and the solar cell manufacturers do not even know what a hot carrier is. In short, the idea is to create solar cells that are close to 80% efficient by harnessing photogenerated charge carriers before they release their excess energy as heat, but even the basic concept idea for a functioning device makes no sense and no such thing was ever built, so the hype train never took off it's niche research corner.

[@ivaylovasilev2688]

It seems that for years now the quantum computers fail to deliver a real value despite the billions which are getting invested

[@SabineHossenfelder]

indeed!

[@24.k.g.f.97]

Already have quantum computers in our heads 😮

[@carlosgaspar8447]

you can add fuel cell batteries and hydrogen fueling stations to that list.

[@softwarephil1709]

Same as Full Self Driving.

[@denisrichard58]

Many failed technologies helped invent new valid technologies. So maybe the money spent was not a waste.

[@TheGiggleMasterP]

Oh no the quantum computer wave collapsed??? WHO PEEKED??

[@skunclep1938]

Heisenburg’s quantum ghost… 😂😂😂

[@johnjakson444]

Wasn't me

[@NJ-wb1cz]

I pooped, does it count?

[@gilian2587]

I can't believe that interpretation of quantum mechanics can be correct. You can't make an observation of state of a particle or proton-electron conglomeration without bombarding it with light, and you can't bombard it with light without effecting it's state. Grumble... grumble...

[@skunclep1938]

@@NJ-wb1cz only for the waves in the toilet bowl.

[@sscalercourtney5486]

KZbin is really really good for people telling you how much smarter they are than other people on a single topic. It's the best. And occasionally it's true. Occassionally.

[@lepidoptera9337]

Not in the case of Sabine, though. Sabine is mostly very good at selling nonsense. ;-)

[@okomi7]

Saw your modular nuclear power plant video and fall in love with your humor. Subbed.

[@davidbrown6494]

As someone who works with cryptography, I'm very interested in how this field progresses. Organizations, like NIST, have been putting tremendous effort into coming up with cryptographic algorithms that are resilient against larger quantum computers, having to basically assume that a practical quantum computer isn't very far away. The problem is that, so far, all of these algorithms are horrendously inefficient, using much more memory, larger keys, and are much slower. They will be needed if quantum computers do become real, however.

[@skunclep1938]

And in the meantime your industry can spend millions on developing security against threats that aren’t actually there. I understand that I’ll be grateful for that if QC becomes a reality, but at what expense? What existing security threats are being ignored whilst cryptographers are tilting their algorithms at QC windmills?

[@MrPoopyButtHole-yo8zo]

So if PQC is successful QKD isn't needed rightM

[@davidbrown6494]

@@MrPoopyButtHole-yo8zo It kind of depends on what you mean by "successful" though. The post-quantum algorithms are currently usable, but have many drawbacks compared to the existing used algorithms. Generally, the keys and signatures are significantly larger, and a lot of the algorithms allow a given key to only be used a certain number of times. A lot of current use of cryptography wouldn't work nearly well with those constraints, and we'd have to re-consider what it was for. Realistically, even if quantum computers are able to break keys, it is likely that it can only be done with very expensive equipment, and more casual use of cryptography could be perfectly safe. It would only make sense to use the PQC algorithms when an attack from a large company, or a country are considerations. At least for a little while. Hopefully, it would give us enough time to transition.

[@axle.student]

@@davidbrown6494 I think it is all a snake trying to eat it's own tail problem. Making the snake longer doesn't really solve the problem in the end.

[@EgonSorensen]

Quantum Computing Collapse - no wonder, it's all being observed and analyzed here and elsewhere

[@ChefStache]

QIS researcher here: spin qubits struggle with charge noise. Much like many tech issues, the physics are figured out and its more of a materials science and engineering problem

[@peterhumphreys9201]

But is it actually a *fixable* problem - yes or no?

[@Jumpertj]

@ChefStache sure) everything is "just" material science and eng. problem)

[@ellengran6814]

There is a reason why our brains are filled with inhibitory neurons .

[@Mr.MasterOfTheMonsters]

Those pesky engineers. You can never trust their capabilities. /s

[@ChefStache]

@peterhumphreys9201 that's what I'm researching actually. There is a thermodynamic minimum to how many noise sources there can be. I'm trying to determine whether that lower bound is acceptable in a certain design

[@sinenomine9093]

As a layperson, I have a question that you might be able to comment on. Particles can supposedly spontaneously appear in empty space. What does this tell us about the nature of space and the nature of particles? Are particles just some kind of twisted-up space? Thanks in advance.

[@michgingras]

seems to be economicaly related : Zapata AI, one of the pioneering startups in the quantum software market, has ceased operations as of October 9, 2024. The sudden terminations appears to have been precipitated by an acceleration of payment of about $2.5 million that the company owed to Sandia Investment Management LP. Originally, this payment was not due until a Valuation Date of March 28, 2026, but the company received notice from Sandia that this date had been accelerated to October 8, 2024. So the company had to shut down and terminate almost all of the employees except for a handful that will be needed for a short time to finalize the termination activities. This event is especially surprising because Zapata had just announced a new partnership with MAG Aerospace on October 1, 2024.

[@SkyGlitchGalaxy]

Im going to teach my dog to read books. Step one is clearly to have hin turn the pages in the book. He can do this most of the time. Step 2 is to find someone who will give me a billion dollars. Im stuck on step two 😢

[@wangsunfuh8889]

Have you considered teaching your dog how to read books about the racist effects of global warming and how his life will be better if he stopped owning things and paid more taxes? Lots of funding there.

[@Ma_X64]

Some years ago I came across a soviet book called "Stochastic calculating devices". It was about that now called quantum computers. But it seems to me that its name is describing the point much clearer. Without this commercial flair of magic.

[@Apjooz]

Russians invented the dice.

[@Ma_X64]

@@Apjooz The basic principles of most of modern technologies are quite old actually.

[@AdvantestInc]

Error correction might just be the unsung hero of quantum computing’s future. It’s not glamorous, but without it, scaling won’t solve much. Google’s progress feels like a small but vital step.

[@FunkyDexter]

Echoing Michel dyakonov words... No amount of error correction will be able to solve quantum computing. A qubit is a superposition with a continuous set of coefficients (parameters) that must be controlled precisely to get the state you want. As you increase the number of qubits as 2^N, even the number of parameters increase like that. The result is a enormous number of parameters that must be controlled even for a low number of qubits (50). Which is basically an unsolvable engineering issue. The other, but not less important issue, is with theory itself. We cant precisely control even the state of ONE qubit. That's because of Heisenberg uncertainty principle. No amount of error correction can account for this, and it's well known that without error correction a QC is impossible.

[@stevebuckley7788]

Parity is exponential, this is why from day one I said quantum computing would never outperform regular binary silicon gate computing. There are however some notable exceptions in the cryptography/communication sector where the massive overhead can be ignored in order to transmit a symmetric encryption key to a military satellite for example.

[@d.l.d.l.8140]

I come here for somewhat layman explanations of things I find complicated. Of course, some (or much, depending on topic)of it still goes over my head, having no formal knowledge, but you’re also entertaining and likeable, so, three out of three. 👍🏼

[@lightlegion_]

Your creativity is incredibly refreshing!

[@tritile]

Quantum computers are waiting for fusion eletricity to power them... and guess what fusion start-ups are waiting for to help with calculations?

[@Starjumper2821]

Hey, if AI collapses too there are a lot of prime computing sources just sitting there.

[@HarryLarsson-b2n]

@@Starjumper2821 ai will never collapse because it was never up

[@matt.stevick]

@@HarryLarsson-b2n no one could think this unless head in sand

[@Mr.MasterOfTheMonsters]

@@HarryLarsson-b2n Bro's living in a cave.

[@oompalumpus699]

​@@matt.stevick 'LLMs are overhyped and wasteful Rube-Goldberg machines. Wetware tech AI is what we should be focusing on.'

[@MajSolo]

An old technician here , even if the quantum chip performs very well it can only be used for specific calculations that involve a small data set, the quantum chip obviously is riding on top of classical motherboards and hard drives so the quantum chip can not spray too much data or the rest of the structure will be overloaded. So only certain problems can be assigned.

[@marksfolly123]

Interesting and underrated point!

[@thedevilneveraskstwice7027]

lmao, you have zero idea about what you are trying to lie about

[@MajSolo]

@@thedevilneveraskstwice7027 Ok it is ok I want YOU to calmly explain computer hardware to me. EVERYTHING can not be quantum in a quantum computer. They too expensive to make. So explain to me how a quantum computer can pump large amount of data FAST. NO , it is small data sets. Immediately they idientified DECRYPTION and MOLECULE simulation for quatum chips. You can PACK that into a quantum chip and RUN. But IF the chip WALKs through large amount of data or SPRAY data it is NOT the quantum chip ANYMORE .... it is the structure of the rest of system. And it is CLASSICAL tech.

[@MajSolo]

The Vatican BOUGHT secure transmission from som company who use quantum entanglement to detect if anybody is peeking in. That some company had a professor as front figure so they believe it is all true. But that is all they can do, detect it. I do not think Priests are experts in procurement. IF they detect someone listening they can ABORT the transmission in a millisecond. But it is all they can do. There is no way they can continue with a unbraekable transmission.

[@scotthime6928]

@@thedevilneveraskstwice7027 Actually he/she does. I just mentioned it above, but there are things QC does well, and things it does not. And the biggest issue is whether the things it does will will provide significant benefit to humanity. More to the point, enough benefit to justify the investment and the ENORMOUS energy requirement.

[@ThePaulv12]

You forgot Brian and Kevin from accounting overseeing the whole administration imbroglio.

[@takutok1434]

i’m double majoring in engineering physics and computer engineering currently and I’ve been wanting to get into this line of work since I started college about 3 years ago, and now it looks like I might have to work towards something else now 😭

[@91F2Z]

I've actually got my quantum computer working, made up of old entangled USB cables soaking in a beer cooler, and the error correction is fantastic. No matter the problem entered, the solution is always, for some strange reason, 42. According to my estimation, that answer may be right or wrong, or both at the same time.

[@renegadeprism42]

Now if u could just find the question...

[@app0ll0nysus]

What's the question?

[@renegadeprism42]

@@app0ll0nysus oh BOY, if only we knew😩

[@santerisatama5409]

What is the only arithmetic constant? What are the only natural numbers x and y, that for every hyperoperation level (meaning for addition, multiplication, etc.), xx=y?

[@skyyefinance]

I thought you were going to say the solution was beer…

[@SunnyAquamarine2]

This reminds me of a short my 14 year old son sent me. "As a knight, it is your duty to slay dragons," said the king. "Very well, my liege, may I ask why?" Said the knight. "Because they hoard wealth, and people are afraid of their capricious moods," said the king. "Very well," said the knight, drawing his sword.

[@justinklenk]

"We have seen the enemy... and it is --us-- mega-capitalism's capricious greed." Alas. 😢

[@SunnyAquamarine2]

@RickJaeger yikes, I quoted the channel and it was not grammatically correct. Embarrassing, but I thank you for letting me know. I'll edit my comment.

[@justinklenk]

@@SunnyAquamarine2 My hero!

[@MCsCreations]

Oh, I don't know, Sabine... The Pentagon alone loses more money than that every year. So... Who knows. Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

[@mennovanlavieren3885]

They don't actually lose it. They just can't tell where it is. BIG difference.

[@MCsCreations]

@@mennovanlavieren3885 Well... You're not wrong...

[@thedevilneveraskstwice7027]

I am glad for Pentagon losing money in the way you think It does. It saves the lives of many throughout the world. God bless US.

[@pirobot668beta]

I am old and cynical: Q-computing looks/feels/smells like String Theory. By that I mean to say that both endeavors hold great promise (among the Faithful) yet are beset with that ancient curse of "we can't make it work and we don't know why"

[@arib1234]

You obviously don't understand quantum computing and its current state.

[@informeducateself]

I guess you could say they were stringing you along.

[@PUMPADOUR]

I bought IONQ at around 4$. now it is 15$, I am very confident it will double soon again...

[@jamesofdiamonds4389]

you got it

[@troymartin7923]

I'm slightly terrified of the day AI starts to make sense of quantum computing. Also, a massive amount of respect to you for your undertaking here on KZbin. I've been a viewer in the shadows since your relative start and your explosive growth is well-deserved. Keep up the wonderful work you do!

[@BorjaPeropadre]

@SabineHossenfelder, at min <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="60">1:00</a> you say "In the new roadmap IBM has simply dropped those plans", but the Innovation roadmap that you have on the screen (right below the Development roadmap you point with the arrow) you see that Kookaburra (4000+qubits) is still there, same year. No one dropped anything

[@dg8620]

I'm a novice on the subject, but if you zoom in on the details of the Kookaburra, it no longer mentions the additional qbits.

[@Vatsek]

That very advanced quantum computer from IBM is actually called Cuckooburra.

[@stefantrebinjac]

The quantum computing will remain in a superposition of promising and unpromising is the most quantum statement out here. 😂

[@nihilisticboi3520]

Looks like we went from "The Quantum Winter is coming" 2 years ago to "The quantum hype bubble is about to burst" a year ago and currently at "The quantum computing collapse has begun".

[@bobbarclay316]

I remember reading about a Computer named HAL trying to correct errors that became apparent at a very bad time.

[@markmowbray1769]

You are great! Not only do you make the “complicated “ accessible you make me laugh. Brilliant job.

[@JenniferCochran-w5e]

Hit 250k today. Appreciate you for all the knowledge and nuggets you had thrown my way over the last months. Started with 24k in August 2024..,.

[@DianaMarco-x9v]

I would really like to know how much work you really did put in to get to this stage

[@JenniferCochran-w5e]

I will be forever grateful to you, you changed my whole life and I will continue to preach on your behalf for the whole world to hear that you saved me from huge financial debt with just a small Investment, thank you Jihan Wu you're such a life saver

[@RampKevorkian]

I'm favoured, 90K every week! I can now give back to the locals in my communities and also support the church. God bless America,, thank you Mr Jihan Wu😊🎉

[@haldorsonsmolarek]

Waking up every tenth of each month to £210,000 it’s a blessing to I and my family… Big gratitude to this same Jihan Wu🙌

[@CoutchWinburn]

Most rich people stay rich by spending like the poor and investing without stopping then most poor people stay poor by spending like the rich yet not investing like the rich but impressing them. People prefer to spend money on liabilities, Rather than investing in assets and be very profitable

[@Abacae7]

I think the main issue is demand. The reality seems to be that the number of applications that need quantum supremacy level power is currently unclear. Applications that will use thousands of 5,000+ qubit power is just not currently known. People who talk about Quantum Laptops don’t know much about the technical challenges in all the competing implementations and the lack of need for that level of computational power for applications other than password breaking (Ie, likely illegal) uses.

[@faroncobb6040]

If anyone can make error correction work well enough that scaling up can be done, the NSA will pay however much it costs to build and run a quantum computer capable of decrypting at least the important bits from all the stored encrypted information they have been stockpiling for years.

[@faroncobb6040]

@@buhmand That is not how that works, that is not how any of it works. A quantum computer would be finding an encryption key, not a password, and since the copy of the message you are trying to decrypt is on your own computer you would have all the attempts you wanted. Except that doing a quantum decryption would be the equivalent of trying every single key in one pass, so any kind of delay wouldn't matter anyways. If someone with a quantum computer was trying to break a password, they would copy the encrypted message sent when that password was used to log on. Then they would decrypt the password on the quantum computer and then use it to log on in a single try. If the people with the quantum computer haven't managed to copy an encrypted version of the password, the quantum computer would add nothing.

[@justinrose5515]

I find it interesting to see people in the comments actively root against innovation and scientific exploration. Appears, classically, cynicism is being mistaken for intelligence?

[@abebuckingham8198]

People often confuse value with money. They see money being spent with no return and they assume that means it has no value. It's horribly naive but it's a natural consequence of capitalism.

[@herrbonk3635]

Sometimes true, but I usually see it the other way round. Being easily lead is mistaken for "bright", "progressive" and "modern".

[@neuroopticon]

As a non-scientist science reader, I think scientists sometimes get to know one thing really well sometimes at the expense of the bigger picture. Specifically, if Sabine actually knew where the really big dollars were going and what they were funding, she'd realize that long shot research is a comparatively good investment.

[@MrScrofulous]

Nah, it’s that normal people resent snake oil salesmen.

[@SPVLaboratories]

It’s a reaction to the bullshit narrative the media and marketing has been spinning about quantum computing. I would guess people here would like to see a working QC one day, but we also want the community to be more realistic

[@Fleck2011]

I feel like this is too short and too focused on Google's and IBM's efforts in QC. Also I dont know why you paint error correction in such a negative way. Classical computers do the same thing and as long as your physical qubits are above the error correction threshold, everything is as it should be. Considering that quantum computers could impact our life in a crucial way - maybe even curing cancer - is also too short sighted in my opinion. As you said, throwing money at the problem doesnt solve it.

[@Breehive]

The optimist in me knows that continuing to attack a problem is the only way to find a solution. I’m tired of the narrative that’s “wow money wasted nothing to see haha waste of time. Let’s stay in stone age progress stupid”. I’m sure there are bad noodles wrapped up in the industry just for the money, but there are also genuine individuals working hard to solve these problems. To find a way. Early growing pains are rarely linear.

[@JohnSmith-l7c]

I remember how long it took for the computers of today to develop to today's level. It's going to take time. Back when I was much younger, I was buying & then building my own computers, long before the internet. It was an exciting time! But there was a lot of "vapor ware". False promises, thousands of companies & people develop new technology and then their products & company would disappear. It seems to be happening even faster lately. Unfortunately, I don't believe I will be around long enough to see most of these changes. But it will be interesting!🤔

[@VoiceTotheEndsOfTheEarth]

Usually takes 30 years for new tech to go mainstream.

[@Thomas-gk42]

Happy about these updates.💚

[@Kelberi]

"Promising and Unpromising." Sabine the Savage😂😂😂

[@cfpai]

I entered this field later than many leading research groups globally, investing my resources over the past two years. Through my work, I’ve come to two key realizations: (1) There are numerous unconventional computing approaches-such as probabilistic computing and coherent Ising machines-that seem far more practical than quantum computing. (2) Many quantum computing startups produce qubits that fall short in quality, often presenting only the most optimistic results. Even those projections are based on theoretical advantages, not actual demonstrations

[@bobtrower567]

Sounds about right, but ... (1) I expect advances in AI to help with this. (2) We have empirically been spectacularly successful with technology improvement. Modern silicon is breathtakingly advanced compared to where it started.

[@mantasr]

The Fusion energy of computing.

[@SahilP2648]

Wrong. Eventually AI will run on quantum computers, and only then will it become conscious (Orch OR theory). We are just at the beginning stages of quantum computing, like machine learning a decade or two ago. Net positive fusion though can only happen in stars, and we are chasing a ghost goose.

[@Leif-yv5ql]

Wake me up when a quantum computer solves a single unsolved problem.

[@michalchik]

I predict this video will not age well. At a minimum, the NSA is going to throw stupid amounts of money at this problem as well as the Chinese government, to crack decades of archives of things that were public key encrypted by using shores algorithm. We know there are quantum chemistry computations that these systems are good for and they can solve tremendously important problems for 100 billion dollar organizations like pharmaceutical companies. The price certainly will collapse following a trajectory like Moore's law just as it did with the semiconductors and DNA sequencing. There were very good and sensible arguments that happened in the late 1940s and early 1950s predicting that the whole country would have a need for not more than a half dozen digital computers. Then the US census bureau ordered five for the census, economies of scale and technological improvements took off. Bell labs made the first practical transistor and then somebody, it's still a matter of debate, worked out the first photo lithography integrated circuits and the rest is history.

[@braindecay9477]

Could be true, could also be complete BS - that's the issue, we really can't tell/know from our current POV

[@w8stral]

Baloney What can quantum "computers" do that normal can't? Nothing. Theoretically slightly better is not better. Now if they were EMP proof THEN the military would be interested. Until then--> NO

[@jeffwads]

Sir, you should invest your personal fortune in this technology and tell us about it when you score it big. Of course, in all probability, that will never happen. But hey, give it a shot.

[@VoiceTotheEndsOfTheEarth]

Chinese claimed to have already cracked it or at least shown that they can with their QC.

[@michalchik]

@@jeffwads it's part of the reason why I do have money in Google and IBM, unfortunately there is no good way to directly invest in this technology as part of a diversified portfolio.

[@farkasfulop6476]

How much did the first mechanical computers cost compared to the later used naval calculators? How much did the first electronic computers cost compared to the laptop you use today? I am not sure if I see a trend but a 100B doesn't seem excessive

[@dw675]

I wish you would have made some comments or observations on what microsoft, atom, and quantinuum are up to. Feels like there's too much focus on the superconducting implementations.

[@ewaf88]

I used to get plenty of error correction from my school teacher, big round circles over every spelling mistake. After a while, she gave up as it was becoming too expensive.

[@MrAlanCristhian]

Here is the occasional reminder that technology doesn't improve infinitely.

[@DanieĺȘerban-s6z]

We have peaked a long time ago, it s downhill from here.

[@matteocercaci5320]

This comment is meaningless. What do you mean by "technology doesn't improve"? Even the slightest improvement is technically and concretely an improvement. And technological improvements are being made every single day

[@MrAlanCristhian]

@matteocercaci5320 I made this comment because public believes that technology will improve forever. But It will not. In engineering, we can also calculate when a technology will stop improving. For example, we already know that a matrix multiplication algorithm will never take less than n^2 operations. Another example, Elon Musk said in an interview with every day astronaut that the raptor engine achieved 99% of it theoretical efficiency. So, that engine just can't be improved anymore.

[@tastyfrzz1]

Yeah, LED lights are one example. TV resolution is another.

[@yakovdan]

Certainly, a particular technology can have an upper bound imposed by math, physics or economic sense. However, real life is not a video game tech tree that you can complete and progress no further. Even within a particular technology, most often it is not obvious how much room for improvement there still is.

[@DudeManDude-ot5fv]

I think error correction will counter most of quantum's speed advantage.

[@thefigmaster3519]

If the error correction is a polynomial factor, then no it won't

[@levilukeskytrekker]

+

[@DudeManDude-ot5fv]

@@thefigmaster3519 it doesn't matter when the majority of qubits are errors. I'm saying that it won't ever be stable enough to gain an advantage. It's most likely going to require several tries per cycle to get all the qubits stable. And it would still always require some level of error correction after computing. Plus I'm like 30% sure quantum computing won't become an actual thing except for a few novelty systems. Because as far as I can find the only software running on actual quantum hardware is just strings of random numbers.

[@axle.student]

@@DudeManDude-ot5fv The problem is they try to treat an analog system like it is digital. Noise/error/uncertainty is a feature of analog that makes analog analog.

[@SFH99621]

@@DudeManDude-ot5fv Existing QC platforms are steadily approaching error thresholds at which error correction can be mathematically proven to have polynomial overhead. . .

[@connortweedie2446]

As an Aussie studying physics in Brisbane, PsiQuantum is honestly very exciting. Yes they're an American company, but most of the founders are Aussies, and UQ has been a huge centre for quantum information theory over the past few decades. A lot of important algorithms for especially photonic quantum computing have come out of here (shoutout to Gerard Milburn!), and hearing the company actually talking about their plans, it's seeming very promising, especially with these new developments in fusion gates

[@antonyhoward2759]

For a billion it should be exciting, i still have no idea how this will assist everyday Aussies!

[@ADEpoch]

Sabine. A question for you if I can ask it? Analogue computers were all the rage until the speed of digital computers overtook them. Note all this money being pumped into getting something that can hold a varying state seems like a lot. Would it be more economically viable to increase the performance of operational amplifiers instead?

[@seiedmohammadrezafatemi3878]

Your information about existing quantum computer architectures is very limited and wrong For example, Google had tunable qubits while IBM has fixed frequency qubits. That’s why IBM scaled to 1000 qubits so fast. But it’s extremely worse in terms of error. So IBM probably gave up and will turn to a Google like architecture. Quantum computing will not die soon, because it’s unique and only way to improve computation exponentially and part of the larger flow of quantum technologies. With almost certainty, quantum computers will be part of the future. Unless, you prove BBP is equal to BQP and give an algorithm to convert algorithms from BQP to BBP

[@oldjoec3710]

Given that quantum computing is hyped as a better, faster way to solve a limited class of computational problems, the epitaph for quantum computing may go like this: "IT WAS A $100B SOLUTION FOR A $10B PROBLEM."

[@PrometheanConsulting]

Personally, this Sabine's take on this seems alarmist and sensationalist. The very first product I see is probably already attainable; a quantum dongle for encryption. And that could protect the world's economy [somewhat] from other emerging quantum (and classical) evolution.

[@VladimirNicolici]

A dongle? Like something you would carry with you in your pocket? You realize that the current devices require temperatures close to absolute 0 to operate and are meters in size? And cost tens of millions of dollars to build?

[@PrometheanConsulting]

@@VladimirNicolici You have limited vision, but sure. You do recall that mainframes used to fill entire rooms, right? I presented a simple and probably achievable use case that would justify the entire investment and industry. You thought a flex was in order.

[@VladimirNicolici]

@@PrometheanConsulting You said "probably already attainable". Which to me means something like this year or next year. You know how long it took from "mainframes" that fill entire rooms to having a computer (smart phone) in our pockets? Roughly 60 years, from around 1940 to 2000. I would be very surprised to see a quantum computer, of any complexity, in the average home 20 years from now, let alone in my pocket. It's not about "flexing", it's just that in my opinion a "dongle" would be one of the least feasible practical applications of QC in the short term. And I couldn't see how you thought otherwise. I still can't.

[@SPVLaboratories]

@@PrometheanConsulting”probably achievable” 😂😂😂

[@mbogucki1]

An administration to administer an administration of administers...isn't that how government works? We could replace everyone with Quantum Computers. 😅

[@peterhumphreys9201]

To be fair, most people could be replaced with an old 8-bit computer.

[@FredBlogs-j7j]

It even more fundamental. - it is how managers work!

[@santerisatama5409]

Radically decentralized Byzantine fault tolerant massively parallel computing (called also "crypto" and "blockchain" ) is quantum computing in that sense.

[@emak4558]

So, your decision to ignore IonQ ? Should that be interpreted as you do not feel their technology is competitive? Or you failed to do a proper survey of the participants in the field ?

[@tschak909]

You still have to serialize the result, the collapse into the classical domain costs substantially, and this gets more difficult when you have to reconcile multiple groups of qubits.

[@bloodyblackjack4157]

How does one remove errors from a system that utilizes probability as a foundational calculation feature? It's like the weather man showing you spaghetti models for storm trajectory and you pick a line, and then you want to remove the possibility that that is the wrong line, and you want to use more spaghetti models to exact the error handling, which requires error handling. Wait till the investors find out superposition is just erroneous data.

[@MrPoopyButtHole-yo8zo]

Nice analogy lol. If somehow Copenhagen interpretation is proved useless then we know the algorithms won't ever work too.

[@levilukeskytrekker]

This is like how so-called AI is really just a misapplied sorting algorithm hooked up to a random number generator, and then people want to refine the randomizers to randomly prompt the randomizer to not be too random. I'm starting to think we should've worked harder to make sure business executives could do math.

[@NuclearCraftMod]

In quantum computing, you use quantum error correcting codes, which are analogous in some sense to classical error correcting codes. They're complicated for the exact reason you are concerned about: they need to be able to preserve the coherence of the logical quantum state of the qubits.

[@SFH99621]

The 'errors' aren't due to the stochastic nature of qubits per se; the errors occur simply because we aren't able to build good enough qubits yet. Theoretically, it is possible to have quantum computers with no errors (despite use of stochastic algorithms).

[@jttcosmos]

The irony is that $100B is what some companies are currently looking to pour into the next generation of LLMs... Personally feel that in the long term a functioning quantum computer would be a better investment, but the hype shoe is currently on the other foot.

[@wardriver1980]

Exactly. Look at the valuation of the biggest AI companies. What are a few (hundred) billion?

[@desertdude540]

Both are absolute wastes of money.

[@VladimirNicolici]

Yeah, it's debatable how much more LLMs can be improved and if it's worth the costs. They seem to scale well with giving them a lot of good training data, but that's not an unlimited resource. The Internet is getting more and more polluted by their output so it's harder and harder to get clean training data. But, while LLMs are clearly overhyped too, and despite their many problems, they are quite useful, even for regular people, even today. Quantum computing makes a lot of promises for the future, and while it will no doubt be useful for science, I think it's not likely to have the same impact in day to day life as LLMs currently do. There is also talk about combining AI with quantum computing, but I'm a bit skeptical about that. But I've been wrong before, so we'll see.

[@GJP1169]

You bring some sanity into the insane world of physics 😅

[@MelodySparkleroni490]

Some saltiness you mean

[@jonasscheuer7639]

IONQ YTD +104% 52w High: 25.78 52w Low 6.26 Last 24.78

[@Mernom]

Remember that the phone that sits in your pocket now is stronger than the early generation computers, which were the size of entire rooms. QC will probably reach viability someday... But not anytime this decade, I think. It should be viewed as an investment in the RnD of an emergent tech in it's infancy, not something that will return your investment next year.

[@anxious_robot]

This poor negative woman. Ionq beats earnings lifting all quantum stocks. Her commentary will note age well, and it's a shame people listen to this negative person.

[@shiraztk]

Quantum computing will not collapse until you one observed it

[@alvarogonzalez2078]

I see what you did there, and it was genius

[@YiOughta]

Schrodinger's neighbors want to know where their cat is

[@tmspironic6422]

Ask Beethoven … who’s rolling over to ask Tschaikowski…

[@ravenmad9225]

I like cats. 🐱

[@petermartin7885]

Another sensational title for clciks. How many videos does that make this week, Sabine?

[@womp6338]

Quantum Computing Situation Is Crazy

[@anthonyminchinton3399]

Most informative. Didn't this happen with classical computing? We started with ENIAC (or the Babbage calculator) and ended up with the iPhone. Could you please explore the potential effects of quantum on the banking sector (password hacking etc), the blockchain (creating enormous amounts of new crypto currency and thus devaluing it), government digital currencies (duplicating, counterfeit, etc) and encryption / de-encryption generally. Already we have nation states hoarding other nations encrypted data on the basis of de-encryption it by quantum computing.

[@willnitschke]

It's fascinating how someone's brain can work in most fields of study, but when it comes to global warming, it completely switches off.

[@Triple_J.1]

Global Warming is not the issue politicians claim. Earth is a closed-loop system. Nothing arrives or leaves (except helium). Carbon dioxide entrapped in "fossil fuels" was once not trapped. A cursory look at the science shows 280ppm trapped in the oldest ice on earth, at the time the planet froze over and 90% of land dwelling mammals went extinct (this was only 10,000-30,000ya). We are only just out of this wretched cold period. And humanity barely survived. In addition to increased solar activity, the planet gained 100ppm on its own in a short time before the industrial revolution. It has since gained another 50-80ppm in only 150-200 years. This is certainly man made. But to say this is going to lead to death on the planet is pure religious fantasy. All of the coal and oil is plant matter. And all of that plant matter came from photosynthesis. Carbon in the atmosphere used to be far, far higher. When it was 2,200ppm lizards grew 20ft tall. Mushrooms 2m in diameter. Trees were often twice as tall as they are now. When the carbon content was 8,000ppm (20x current) we had the Cambrian explosion. A time when not only more new species evolved, but entirely new branches of the evolutionary chain developed. As to these cataclysimcal tripocal storms everyone is afraid of, there is an upper limit to storm strength and this is barometric pressure. This is a function of atmospheric density, and this will not change appreciably. To generate strong einds there must be a pressure differential, and this dofferential is finite and already limits the maximum storm strength possible anywhere on earth. Adding heat only increases the frequency, or probability, that any given storm might be stronger than otherwise. As to the overall ideology: all living things are carbon based. To say carbon will ruin earth or destroy life on earth is pure anti-science, anti-reason, insanity.

[@Triple_J.1]

Global Warming is not the issue politicians claim. Earth is a closed-loop system. Nothing arrives or leaves (except helium). Carbon dioxide that is entrapped in "fossil fuels" was once not trapped. It was in the atmosphere. A cursory look at the science shows 280ppm carbon content trapped in the oldest ice on earth, at the time the planet froze over and 90% of land dwelling mammals went extinct (this was as recent as 10,000-30,000ya). We are only just out of this wretched cold period. And humanity barely survived. In addition to increased solar activity, the planet also gained 100ppm CO2 on its own in a short time before the industrial revolution. It has since gained another 50-80ppm in only 150-200 years. Most of which in the last 50 years. This is certainly man made. And burning fossil fuels is clearly releasing this carbon. But to say this is going to lead to death on the planet is pure religious fantasy. All of the coal and oil is plant matter. Decomposed in an anaerobic environment. All of that plant matter came from photosynthesis. Carbon in the atmosphere used to be far, far higher. And plants absorbed it, converted it, got buried in landslides and river bottoms, and trapped it. Before, when atmospheric carbon was 2,200ppm, lizards grew well over 20ft tall. Mushrooms 2m in diameter. Trees were often twice as tall as they are now. On average. When the carbon content was 8,000ppm (20x current) this facilitated the Cambrian explosion. A time when not only more new species evolved, but entirely new branches of the evolutionary chain developed. And we have never seen this abundant creative evolution since. As to these cataclysimcal tripocal storms everyone is afraid of, there is an upper limit to storm strength and this is barometric pressure. This is a function of atmospheric density, which is gas molecular weight, times height. And this will not change appreciably. To generate strong winds there must be a large pressure differential, and this differential is finite, and already limits the maximum storm strength possible anywhere on earth. Adding heat only increases the frequency, or probability, that any given storm might be stronger than otherwise. But they cannot become some sort of super storm the world has never seen. Because this defies not only science. But physics as well. (The latter is apparently held to a higher standard of truth). As to the overall ideology of catastrophe from global warming due to mankind's release of ancient carbon stores: All living things are carbon based. To say carbon will ruin earth or destroy life on earth is pure anti-science, anti-reason, insanity.

[@0nullBit]

what are u trying to say

[@willnitschke]

@@0nullBit Ideology trumps logic.

[@Daimo83]

It's quite amusing to watch physics reduced to reactionary entertainment videos.

[@thebloatedwalrusman6415]

Yeah, I'm starting to feel like this channel is going downhill. Recently every single topic has been doomer "it will NEVER happen" takes ("man will never fly in a million years"), and often these takes are about subjects that Sabine has no qualifications for. There's a difference between skepticism and sensationalist nay-saying for clicks.

[@faizanrana2998]

Hrrehee.

[@cromyjr1592]

@@thebloatedwalrusman6415 "sensationalist nay-saying for clicks." - that was a good one. You just characterized 99.9% of videos on KZbin. This channel makes no exception.

[@IroAppe]

Remember the videos about topics about 1-2 years ago? Yes, me too barely. Since the "Science News" category started, it has taken over nearly all the channel, and we get a bit of commentary, often shallow, that is sometimes interesting. But looking into things for real, looking at experiments or aspects in physics, explaining as deep as it is possible - you know, a real science education channel, that's long ago. Thanks for the heads up, because I needed that wakeup call, to reflect what Sabine does nowadays. I have to ask myself the question, if just some commentary on science news is enough for me. Otherwise I might unsubscribe to look for other places. The reason I came for here, isn't there anymore.

[@Daimo83]

@@IroAppe You said it better than I did!

[@FrancesRyan-b2p]

AI’s always have a nice strategy to present for trade, but I haven’t seen any trade strategy as good as that of Shanita Creswell, she absolutely made a fortune out of the little amount I started trading with and she was the best teacher and mentor I’ve ever met all my period of trading

[@ArnulfoSzafran]

Naturally, there's a lot of math involved in forex trading. but this is often presented in forms of daunting technical charts, indicators, patterns.

[@ShaniquaMcquiller]

Trading systems allow you to limit the factor of emotional influence on decision-making, as well as to give the trade a certain degree of systemic character.

[@DaltonLeidemer]

The best course of action if you lack market knowledge is to ask a consultant or investing coach for guidance or assistance. Speaking with a consultant helped me stay afloat in the market and grow my portfolio to about 65% since January, even though I know it sounds obvious or generic. I believe that is the most effective way to enter the business at the moment.

[@GeraldBarnett-su8vo]

I need advice on how to rebuild my portfolio and develop more successful tactics. Where can I find this coach?

[@JacolienVos]

I’ve grown so much in forex through the mentoring of Shanita Creswell

[@kemaraaramek3178]

The very principle of quantum mechanics/computing clearly predicts that everybody perfectly understands it while at the same time nobody never will even begin to understand it.

[@thegreatreverendx]

Assuming quantum computing works, this doesn’t necessarily mean the beginning of the end of quantum computing, but probably the beginning of its postponement until human society becomes a little wealthier and more scientifically advanced.

[@JamaicaWhiteMan]

I'd invest in quantum confusing but have already put all my money into NFT's.

[@vytah]

Was that before or after you traded those Gamestop and BBBY stocks?

[@NianLisa]

I was a stay at Home mom with no money in my IRA or any savings of my own, which was scary at 53 years of age. Three years ago I got a part time job and save everything I make. After 3 years, I am 56 yo and have put $9,000 in an IRA and $40,000 in my portfolio with CFA, Evelyn Infurna. Since the goal of getting a job was to invest for retirement and NOT up my lifestyle, I was able to scale this quickly to $150,000. If I can do this in a year, anyone can.

[@StephanieMoore-oj7vz]

I know this lady you just mentioned. Evelyn Infurna Services is a portfolio manager and investment advisor. She gained recognition as a former employee at Goldman Sachs; a renowned investor she is. Evelyn Infurna has demonstrated expertise in investment strategies n has been involved in managing portfolios and providing guidance to clients.

[@JeremiahHoward-ys4pt]

I went from no money to lnvest with to busting my A** off on Uber eats for four months to raise about $20k to start trading with Evelyn Infurna. I am at $128k right now and LOVING that you have to bring this up here

[@DavidMartins-y1c]

As a newbie, what do I need to do? How can I invest, on which platform? If you know, please share. I'm new to this, please how can I contact her?

[@NianLisa]

Use her name to quickly conduct an internet search.

[@NianLisa]

SHE’S MOSTLY ON TELEGRAMS APPS WITH THE BELOW NAME.

[@Abyss-Will]

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="175">2:55</a> That's basically how the government works lol

[@jamesconkey1480]

Nailed it

[@pcopeland15]

Thar particular cynical cliche is old, dull, and shows a lack of analytic discrimination.

[@pcopeland15]

Da' gobment. A more interesting question is whether export restrictions to ASML will push China to FastTrack their own version of hyperUV chip fabrication tech.

[@Langkowski]

For decades there has been news published on a regular basis about "breakthroughs" that "puts us one step closer to a quantum computer". We are apparently getting closer and closer, but the goal is still far away in the distance.

[@roybatty-]

When quantum computers can do abacus level calculations, can we really say it ever took off to the point where we can say a "collapse" has begun?

[@NickDusting]

Quantum computing always struck me as a solution looking for a problem.... a brilliant demonstration of technology and useless at the same time.

[@jllemin4]

Definetly. On the more speculative side I remember when the dwave website bragged about really weird stuff like claiming to be reaching into another dimension of existance to extract data, which kind of makes sense when you are isolating a particle at such a low energy point it would be more open to other influence. Also sounds like they just let the electrons spit out information and see what it says, which is weird.

[@dncbot]

A problem looking for a problem

[@ZAWARUD00]

This is called "research". Most of research doesn't have a direct usage in aim.

[@JJ-zr6fu]

@ZAWARUD00 for profit companies don’t research for research sake

[@NickDusting]

@ZAWARUD00 not quite...the initial research - is qbit computing possible - was completed some time back. This is application and therein lies my concern. The bandwagon was never going to match reality in that qbit computing requires extreme physical conditions to work. That was never going to scale to extensive commercial use.

[@KevinInPhoenix]

What problems that can be solved by Quantum Computing are worth the cost of the hardware to solve them?

[@viralsheddingzombie5324]

Encrypted stuff.

[@ucantSQ]

Quantum computing itself

[@michaelrogers1771]

Top of the short list I can think of is Cryptography. Obviously everything quantum costs a fortune, but if that cost is spread out across hundreds of millions of users it could be economical for google or IBM or someone to market quantum cryptography-powered computer security protocol for safe(r) online transactions. I think this is most likely because its not actually all that difficult when compared to other idealized uses, and it would be marketable to a massive amount of customers. Last I checked quantum computers are still doing middle school math, so it may still be awhile.

[@NYCZ31]

Encryption analysis by government intelligence agencies… that’s kinda the only possible application that is plausible I heard about

[@web4639]

Encryption breaking. There's very little that governments and other bad actors won't pay to be able to break into all those encrypted files they have archived.

[@lobabobloblaw]

We coooouuuld stop throwing our money at theories and begin throwing it back into reality. For example, Sam Altman wants to keep talking about all of the change coming. But a more effective approach might be to begin contacting individuals who’ve already lost jobs to AI to apologize. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@walterdean247]

$100 billion is not a lot of money for some governments. It depends on the payoff, but breaking current encryption methods is a goal they are certainly interested in.