You want to know what this D-Wave technology represents? A start.
Yes and no.
Yes, D-Wave technology represents the first practical step in one possible direction for building practical quantum computers.
No, in that it is an insane hype machine. How many pieces have you seen which claims that D-Wave is working on solving NP-complete problems efficiently, something which pretty much everyone believes quantum computers are incapable of doing? If D-Wave can't live up to the hype, it may ruin quantum computing for everyone, and that would be a bad thing.
My mother (who has spent a lot of her life on committees of various kinds) taught me from a young age that the problem isn't often what is done, but the way it's done. D-Wave embodies this principle.
You can write a Hello, World! program that everyone can read in their own language.
Excellent! Being able to broadcast a greeting in all languages and on all channels brings us one step closer to the Star Trek utopia.
You really shouldn't encourage me.
This conversation does seem to have a pretty high rate of change, doesn't it?
No, Indonesian only resembles Latin because it uses the same character base.
Er... no. It also has similar pronunciation, similar word length, broadly similar word order rules, and even some cognates which Indonesian gained through Dutch. I picked that example very carefully. Someone who was not familiar with human writing systems could easily look at (say) Latin, Indonesian, and Romanian, and conclude based on alphabets alone that Indonesian is more closely related to Latin than Romanian is.
Makes sense. The underlying point that I was trying to make is not that machines over a certain size shouldn't have manual transmissions, but simply that automatic transmissions are not the right tool for the job all the time.
You're making me tensor and tensor.
Well, if you were more coordinated, you'd feel better about it. Get my point?
You've gone off on a tangent. It's polarizing. Stop it. Right now.
McCoy: Good God, man!
Kirk: I don't care how you do it, Bones, just fix the damned video.
McCoy: I'm a doctor, not a damned cable monkey!
Spock: Fascinating. This router has no jacks.
Chekov: It's a couragous router. Inwented in Russia.
Uhura: This is not a federation signal. I can't make anything out of it, sir.
Sulu: Faraday shields up. It's good to be Takei, bitches.
Hipsters were doing scientific studies before it was cool.
But I'm sure you know more and better than the designers of the C# and Java languages.
The term that Anders Hejlsberg used was "C-like", which is a much weaker claim than "C-based" or "C derivative". I don't know that James Gosling claimed any similarity to C except for syntax.
I'm sure C++ is also not C based by your definition.
Of course not. C++ and Objective-C are absolutely C-based, in that they share semantics and are even backwards compatible with C. It would be fair to place D and Rust in the C family, too, as well as more obscure languages like NXC, Cyclone and Lite-C. (And that's not counting C's ancestors and close cousins like BCPL and Bliss.)
C# superficially looks like C, in the same way that Indonesian superficially looks like Latin. But Rust is a closer relative to C in the same way that Russian is a closer relative to Latin.
I lurked and posted anonymously for a long time
It's a subsidiary of Amazon, though, so I'm not sure how that is viewed under the law.