Google Claims a Quantum Breakthrough That Could Change Computing.

[Cattledog]

By Cade Metz
Oct. 23, 2019
Updated 5:10 a.m. ET

SAN FRANCISCO — Google said on Wednesday that it had achieved a long-sought breakthrough called “quantum supremacy,” which could allow new kinds of computers to do calculations at speeds that are inconceivable with today’s technology.

In a paper published in the science journal Nature, Google said its research lab in Santa Barbara, Calif., had reached a milestone that scientists had been working toward since the 1980s: Its quantum computer performed a task that isn’t possible with current technology.

In this case, a mathematical calculation that the largest supercomputers could not complete in under 10,000 years was done in 3 minutes 20 seconds, Google said in its paper.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/23/technology/quantum-computing-google.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

[Dennis Donovan]

1. Quite a leap!

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

25. Oh boy......

.

[Guilded Lilly]

29. I miss Sam, Al and Ziggy!

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

32. I remember watching it in college. And just a couple of

years ago, our kid was hooked on it. Totally on her own.

[Guilded Lilly]

38. My kids were bonafide Leapers...like their Mom! :)

[FM123]

28. Ziggy!

[abqtommy]

2. I'm not sure that all technical developments are beneficial but I'm willing to wait and see.

I've been suspicious of Google as a corporate entity for many years now and have worked to avoid associating myself with them to any great extent.

[Perseus]

3. I'm with you on that one

The same with Microsoft and other big corporations in the tech industry. I avoid Facebook like the plague.

[Loki Liesmith]

31. Why would a breakthrough in Quantum Computing

Be anything but awesome?

The problem is never knowledge. Only distribution of knowledge. And Google is very forthcoming about their science.

[democratisphere]

37. Computing has done tremendous damage to humans in conjunction with the damage

they have done to themselves. Boogle and fakebook are very dangerous companies and will become even more so unless they are heavily regulated and put in check.

[LonePirate]

4. I'm paywalled but does the article say how they verified the calculation was correct?

If other systems cannot complete it, how do they know the result is the correct one, rather than a consistent artifact generated by the new system? Did an independent, second system reach the same result?

[PCIntern]

5. I just solved the problem on my Commodore

Which I modified some and yes, the answer is correct.

(This is a Republicans answer to the question. Just state a lie as a fact and stonewall)

[docgee]

11. A lot of people are saying your turbo Commodore is correct.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

6. I don't know, but if it is finding a prime number or a number with only two factors, that can be

... that can be verified in seconds with a standard system. Verifying a two-factor number can take a few hours or days by hand to multiply out the two factors, if it is very large, but it is verifiable even without a computer.

Another test would be to find the primes used encrypt a text. If they are 128 bit primes (or some sufficient number of bits), it can take times like those mentioned to find them, but you can test them in milliseconds by decrypting the text.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. I was able to see a copy. They don't say what the calculation was, but will discuss this afternoon.

IBM disputes that the calculation would take more than two and a half days, not 10,000 years.

As they say, "developing".

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

24. Even so, to reduce the solution time from days to minutes is a notable accomplishment. n/t

[Buns_of_Fire]

8. So they asked the computer, "Is there a God?"

And the computer answered, "There is now."

[thesquanderer]

14. Excellent! And seems to work particularly well with your avatar. ;-) (n/t)

[2naSalit]

22. +1

[Dr. Strange]

41. Nice post, Fredric Brown.

[docgee]

9. The world is going to change dramatically.

[Sancho]

10. The answer to everything is 42...

[2naSalit]

23. That's correct!

[herding cats]

12. Goodbye encryption.

Until someone figures out a way to reinvent it again, it's dead.

[Iggo]

15. Oh wow. That's funny.

I said almost exactly the same thing below.

As soon as I read "10,000 years" that's the first thing that jumped into my mind.

[shawn703]

35. Think it's still pretty safe - barring some other flaw in the encryption mechanism.

AES-256 was something on the order of 10^51 years to be brute forced by 50 theoretical supercomputers. Knocking that down to 10^47 years is still a very long time.

[Iggo]

13. Does that mean encryption is dead now?

[Fortinbras Armstrong]

26. If you have a one time pad consisting of truly random numbers

It can't be broken. The problem, of course, is generating such a set of numbers. Atmospheric noise, solar flux, that sort of thing will do.

What you cannot do to achieve true randomness is use some sort of computer algorithm. As John von Neuman said, "Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin."

[Iggo]

36. Back to dice and random multipliers, I guess.

[bucolic_frolic]

16. Edsel, DaVinci Code, or Laetrile?

If they solved all problems, all limitations, all disease, would we still think we're alive? Can it go backwards in time and make changes? Who will control it, and who will pay for it? Will Trumpers wrest control from IT scientists? Will it prevent war? Make youth eternal? Will only beautiful people use it?

You get the idea. Call me skeptical.

[GoneOffShore]

17. This may see the end of encryption.

[Crowman2009]

18. More like make a few millions, while paying squat to their developers.

This will change nothing for everybody else.

[USALiberal]

21. Most good IT workers make good money, or go somewhere else. Nt

[Duppers]

33. Most, yes, but the upper echelons

of developers do very well.

My son, a deep learning specialist, personally knows a Google employee, a developer, making $1M. Google employs thousands but probably around only 40 people make $1m+.

[NRaleighLiberal]

19. ... to be applied for good, or evil?

a dash of each, I suspect. Power and greed will soon follow.

[Tech]

20. As they continue to back climate deniers. It's all good though, they have lots of money

to pursue both with the tax breaks the company as well as their overlords receive.

[still_one]

27. Now they will be able to spy on us faster and more efficiently

[redqueen]

30. This will make another big jump in automation and AI possible.

Here we go.

[tazkcmo]

34. Huge!

My childhood science fiction coming to life.

[NoMoreRepugs]

39. AI development would initially seem to be the most impacted.

[bigbrother05]

40. Climate and weather forecasting

Refinements in severe weather tracking to save lives comes to mind. Better hurricane models, too.

[kairos12]

42. Reminds me of a joke I heard 30 years ago:

A scientist wanted to create the world's most powerful computer. He did this by chaining together all the world's most powerful supercomputers to one terminal.

The great day arrived and he sat at the terminal staring at the blinking cursor. All the scientists behind him eagerly waiting for the first inquiry. The lead scientist thought for a moment and said, " I know just what to ask."

He types into the terminal, Is there a God?

The computer takes a moment, and sends a response: THERE IS NOW!

[Dr. Strange]

43. Not a joke exactly.

It's a short short story by Frederic Brown:

Answer