Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:No, It Won't. (Score 2) 42

There are already commercial quantum computers from DWave https://www.dwavequantum.com/ . They're rather limited, but they exist. But I don't expect them to be general purpose turing complete by 2029 with very many qbits. Possibly by 2035. And I don't expect them to be personal computers until they stop needing to be cooled with liquid gasses (i.e. supercooled). But I wouldn't bet that this will never be possible.

Comment Re:What qualifies the government (Score 1) 64

I expect that there are groups in the government that have reasonable expertise in that area. But I see no evidence either of what they are (probably some folks in DoD and NSA might have relevant expertise) or reason to believe that they would be tasked with the review.

Comment Re: I'm I'm skeptical too. (Score 1) 86

I think a giant context is not going to be the answer. It's just got too many problems. Better will probably be parsing the context into connected pieces, and at a different level assembling the "lemmas" into "theorums". (Yeah, those aren't quite the right words, but I'm not sure the right words exist, and that's the analogy from math proofs. Code library isn't the right concept as the "lemma" will often be quite specific to the current task.)

Comment Re: Big bada boom (Score 1) 73

Well, a baseball bat *is* a deadly weapon, if used as a weapon.

OTOH, when arguing about whether it's a bomb the definitions of the terms are less clear. And when arguing about whether it's an explosion, high energy chemists/engineers will have a different definition than folks who don't deal with the details.

To me, it's an explosion. If some professional wants to say "No, it's a deflagration." I'm not going to say he's wrong, but I'm not wrong either. We're just speaking different dialects of English.

Slashdot Top Deals

Today is the first day of the rest of your lossage.

Working...