Comment Re: "Powerful" quantum computer (Score 1) 23
You are vastly overestimating QC progress.
You are vastly overestimating QC progress.
Indeed. They can make guesses, but they cannot verify those and the guess may be so far off as to be utterly ridiculous.
No. Well, yes, but only for incapable and insightless humans, such as you.
Only that this one has been a failure for about 50 years now.
You have no clue what you are talking about. Shor's algorithm with something like 18 qbits (to factor 35) remains out of reach at this time. What you reference is not a QC.
No, IBM is not going to scale this tech. They and many others have been trying that for 50 years, with no QC that deserves the name in sight. No idea why they are now lying about this tech being withing their grasp. They have done that a couple of times before, with about as much justification.
In actual reality, the QC factoring record is still 21. That means 5 bit. Shor's algorithm needs about 15 qbits for that, and the entanglement needs to survive a not too long calculation. Note that they tried 35 (i.e. 6 bits at 18 qbits needed) and failed. And that is _still_ the state-of-the-art. Nobody is going to scale anything to any useful size here anytime soon, and quite possibly never.
So it's your argument that the pipes, seals, and other materials used to build all of this are best left with unknown tolerances and unknown failure modes, because they've never gone through destructive testing.
I see you're another graduate from the Stockton Rush school of engineering.
Simple: No other type of AI has "guardrails". I get that you are not smart enough for this level of deduction.
I think rsilvergun could do that long before Elon could. He alone produces 30% of North America's natural gas, the problem is he vents it directly into the atmosphere.
While the US is the uncontested master of climate-change denial, some of it is also going on in Europe. Stupid people enjoy a global distribution.
"Doubting" things is easy. And dumb fuck can do it. Verifying them or proving them wrong is hard. Especially when you do not even try
Because non-destructive testing works sooo much better. Stockton Rush would be so proud that somebody finally agrees with him!
Just like hallucinations. No idea why people expect miracles from generative AI. It is not magic. At all. It is a small step forward, with some limited applications. Useful, but not "transformative".
Obviously, using a tool outside of what it can do well will usually do more damage than good.
What? That would be un-American! Clearly this "treatment" needs to be outlawed immediately!
I mean, a man, unmoving on the ground, not responding. Dead or unconscious. And they are still too cowardly to approach? How utterly pathetic and repulsive.
The trouble with the rat-race is that even if you win, you're still a rat. -- Lily Tomlin