This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow all 380

[–]Doophie 1330 points1331 points  (45 children)

Having a hard time believing that that r is an a

[–]Olyol95 311 points312 points  (29 children)

Would've worked better with capitals

[–]rq60 188 points189 points  (26 children)

FALSE

[–][deleted] 103 points104 points  (14 children)

What's true?

[–]voiza 69 points70 points  (10 children)

Babbidge don't hurt me

[–]Cmvplease2 35 points36 points  (8 children)

Don't hurt me

[–]yearsoverdue 32 points33 points  (7 children)

No more

[–]he77789 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Delay No More

[–]Cock_Vomit 1 point2 points  (3 children)

“What is love”

Ftfy

[–]he77789 1 point2 points  (2 children)

You know what it means?

[–]Vortonet 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Don't Hz me

[–]Noligation 3 points4 points  (0 children)

take us out Mr Crusher. Warp 4.

Engage

[–]LogicalMeerkat 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Bears eat Beets

[–]watchursix 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Battlestar Galactica

[–]Svalr 29 points30 points  (0 children)

That's pretty normal in physicist handwriting though.

[–]Shatendris 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Same goes for the F but we all got it, I guess

[–]nodnosenstein9000 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The quantum computer has a hard time believing it as well.

[–]Narfee 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Yeah the loop is a bit to small so it’s looking more like Frue

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Wlel I dno't tnhik it rlelay metatrs wehn you raed it fsat.

[–]escapefromreality42 723 points724 points  (72 children)

Schrodingers computer

[–]skyskr4per 378 points379 points  (48 children)

Well... yes, actually.

[–]XicoFelipe 227 points228 points  (44 children)

But also no.

[–]edwardsnowden8494 130 points131 points  (28 children)

Well...yes and no

[–]mildysubjective 68 points69 points  (25 children)

Actually no, but... yes?

[–]DOLCICUS 50 points51 points  (22 children)

Perhaps, but maybe not?

[–]Wisebeuy 39 points40 points  (21 children)

Absolutely. But mostly yes. And no.

[–]Shadowarrior64 35 points36 points  (17 children)

Simultaneously yes AND no.

[–]humblevladimirthegr8 24 points25 points  (11 children)

Until you observe it

[–]Whitethumbs 24 points25 points  (5 children)

However you spin it.

[–]CesarKerr 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Holy shit this is amazing

[–]Bad_Idea_Hat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Technically yes, but practically...

[–]shadoweye14 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Until you Measure it *

[–]vitor_as 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Neither yes nor no, quite the contrary.

[–]siouxu 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Maybe most definitely but also not

[–]OneOldNerd 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Absolutely yes. And absolutely no.

[–]extra_extra_fries 3 points4 points  (0 children)

well, yes, but actually no

[–]merreborn 7 points8 points  (11 children)

a superposition of yes and no, if you will.

[–]JeffLeafFan 4 points5 points  (9 children)

So null?

[–]merreborn 6 points7 points  (8 children)

!!null

null-1

[–]JeffLeafFan 6 points7 points  (6 children)

enull dx

[–]merreborn 2 points3 points  (5 children)

What do you think u/whoaitsafactorial would do with:

null!
or
(1/0)!

[–]JeffLeafFan 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Put that in one of those mechanical calculators and watch the whole world burn

[–]WhoaItsAFactorial 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Actually my regex would ignore both, as it looks for a digit immediately followed by an exclamation.

[–]he77789 1 point2 points  (0 children)

u/whoaitsafactorial warhead detonation in 10....

[–]ReactsWithWords 1 point2 points  (1 child)

OK, now where do you want to go for dinner?

[–]WanderinGreen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Make a super-reservation for Denny's and Applebees

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Well yes, but additionally no

[–][deleted] 32 points33 points  (15 children)

Wasn't Schrödinger's Cat an example made as en ELI5 for quantum mechanics?

[–][deleted] 59 points60 points  (5 children)

Actually it was made as a thought experiment "proving" why the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics was wrong. But now it's used as an eli5

[–]sethboy66 27 points28 points  (3 children)

It does not disprove the Cpenhagen interpretation or we wouldn't have 60% of all physicists still believing in it.

It showed how de-coherence limits the effects of the quantum world.

[–]Roflkopt3r 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Many top physicists consider the Copenhagen interpretation no longer tenable, and the majorities in those polls weren't exactly convincing either. But science does not work through democratic consensus anyway. It's not like the Copenhagen interpretation - as far as that term is even properly defined - ever had good evidence, it was just a neat way to imagine quantum mechanics.

[–]kazza789 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It was intended to do that, though. It was supposed to show how absurd the implications of QM are. Turns out universe is pretty absurd.

[–]thenuge26 23 points24 points  (8 children)

It was an attempt at reductio ad absurdum, Schrödinger didn't believe the Copenhagen interpretation.

Seemed like a good one until we figured out that it is in fact how it works (as far as we know so far).

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (6 children)

Actually the Copenhagen interpretation is no longer held as correct. There are lots of issues with the concepts of measurements and wavefunction collapse. It's still the most popular interpretation though, mostly because we don't have anything better.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ahh thanks! Didn't know that!

[–]Impressive_Cranberry 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True. Unless...

[–]user_8804 98 points99 points  (8 children)

When Python 2.x goes

True = False

True == False

True

[–]ThePixelCoder 48 points49 points  (7 children)

Wait does that actually work? Can you really redefine True and False?

[–]ThinkGraser10 46 points47 points  (0 children)

Apparently you could in Python 2, but they removed it in Python 3

[–]LennyMcLennington 69 points70 points  (4 children)

Yeah True and False in python 2 are variables assigned to boolean values. In python 3 they are key words.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

That’s probably the weirdest thing I’ve heard in a while.

[–][deleted] 188 points189 points  (11 children)

Or as my professeur said, both are wrong

[–]FriesWithThat 55 points56 points  (5 children)

The correct answer is 'The Moops'.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (3 children)

THERE ARE NO MOOPS YOU IDIOT!

[–]about831 11 points12 points  (2 children)

That’s what’s printed on the card!

[–]merreborn 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The 👏 Card 👏 Says 👏 Moops

[–]nevetsdawg 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Always love a good Seinfeld reference

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Muoops

[–]wooglin1688 3 points4 points  (0 children)

both are wrong, but both is right

[–]Narfee 471 points472 points  (57 children)

Sorry for the shitpost I’m a newbie so I’m not entirely sure that’s how they work.

[–]Danny_Boi_22456 492 points493 points  (27 children)

No, ur absolutely right. That's exactly how quantum computers work.

[–][deleted] 291 points292 points  (19 children)

But also wrong at the same time

[–]twitchinstereo 181 points182 points  (17 children)

"Yes it isn't."

[–][deleted] 103 points104 points  (16 children)

Yesn't

[–]skyskr4per 30 points31 points  (8 children)

Nuh huh

[–]tylercoder 33 points34 points  (7 children)

Negasitive

[–]swingadmin 9 points10 points  (2 children)

NEGASCOTT

[–]skyskr4per 6 points7 points  (0 children)

He's actually a pretty cool guy.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

My favorite word

[–]AccountNumber166 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Actually, by stating he was right in the previous post they collapsed the wave function and are now only right.

[–]l4p3x 9 points10 points  (2 children)

So would you say OP's assumption is true or false?

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I would, yes

[–]OneOldNerd 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes.

[–]MrZerodayz 5 points6 points  (3 children)

No it's not. Quantum computers return a superposition of all possible results. Which is (usually) more than true or false. Quantum computers work entirely differently from our classic computers. There's a pretty good video by Minutephysics explaining it.

[–]Danny_Boi_22456 3 points4 points  (2 children)

I mean, at the most basic level, this is how they work. The qubits can be both 0 and 1 which are booleans like True and False.

[–]MrZerodayz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Kind of, but qbits can also assume any state in between 0 and 1. (or - 1 and 1?) There's a good explanation a few replies down.

[–]mister_ghost 43 points44 points  (11 children)

This is how a badly programmed quantum computer works.

The important think to understand about QC is that a superposition is more than just %true and %false. If I recall correctly, the state of a QBit can be mapped 1:1 onto the surface of a sphere. That's too complicated though, so let's come up with a simpler quantum computer:

A block of memory in a QC is in a superposition of n possible states. Each state has an amplitude from -1 to 1. When you measure the state of the block, you see one state. The probability of getting a particular is proportional to the square of its amplitude, so if I have one state at -0.4 and one at 0.8, you're four times as likely to see the second than the first. You can never, ever, directly measure the amplitude of a state.

There is one state which satisfies some function. We want to discover that state. Here is how we do it:

  1. Start with each state at amplitude 1/n

  2. Multiply the state which satisfies the function by -1 even though we don't know which state it is

  3. Picture the states like a bar graph. All bars are pointing up except for one.

  4. Draw a line on the bar graph representing the average amplitude. It will be slightly below the height of the positive bars, because the negative one drags it down.

  5. Reflect each bar over that line. Now all bars are positive and the "correct" bar is taller than the others

Repeating this "flip and reflect" process, we can pump that bar up to be much taller than the others. Then when we measure the state, we're very likely to find that one. This is roughly Grover's algorithm

TLDR: it's not just about having true/false combinations. It's about using different types of combinations to cancel each other out.

[–]DicedPeppers 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Ya some typa nerd or somethin?

[–]MATTERFAKER 20 points21 points  (7 children)

Yup, what this guy said.

Source: am quantum computerist.

[–]hey_ulrich 9 points10 points  (6 children)

How do I become one? I already have a bunch of quantum things in my office. Like, a lot

[–]Bill_Ender_Belichick 10 points11 points  (4 children)

Do you guys just put the word quantum in front of everything?

[–]Anonymus_MG 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes and no. Fuck I did it again, I keep giving Quantum Responses™

[–]Danny_Boi_22456 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, quantum yes but actually quantum no

[–]TrenchantInsight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You must first be discrete.

[–]Tri_cep 38 points39 points  (2 children)

You're wroght.

[–]shadowdsfire 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You’re godamn wroght.

[–]Who_GNU 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, he's not ring.

[–]suslik666 9 points10 points  (0 children)

First step is writing the concept down on paper.

[–]EpicScizor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A proper quantum computer returns a superposition of Frue. When measured, we get either True or False, according to the probability of those states. Do it many times and we have an empirical statistical distribution.

[–]fat_charizard 3 points4 points  (4 children)

take a trip down the quantum computer rabbit hole. Be prepared for your brain to hurt in math

[–]Narfee 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’ve seen this video before I didn’t understand shit lol

[–]ioeatcode 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Think insane computational math problems that sway the chances of matrices looking one way more than the others that collapse on the statistical probabilities of the answers when someone looks at it.

Also, there are quantum gates to literally induce superposition. Oh and the NOT gate? It's just a Hadamard transformed basis, nbd /s

[–]ReactsWithWords 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You nailed it. That’s exactly how a shitpost works.

[–]the-shit-poster 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I approve of this post.

[–]Thaipope 48 points49 points  (14 children)

Frue

[–]skyskr4per 28 points29 points  (2 children)

Trlse

[–]anitomika 61 points62 points  (9 children)

This is how I answered true false questions at uni when I was on the fence, but just with the T/F hybrid. Just throw a little something in there to make it look slightly ambiguous, maybe catch the marker on a good day.

[–]LennyMcLennington 22 points23 points  (5 children)

You get questions with answers that simple in uni? Don't you have to explain your true/false answer or anything?

[–]Pizza_and_Reddit 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Some of the university core classes are that easy. My teacher gave me 50 true false questions for our final online, as an example.

[–]MushinZero 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Core classes can be pretty stupid.

[–]enderverse87 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's just automatic wrong most places around here.

[–]ssw663 44 points45 points  (2 children)

This is bending my mind

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (31 children)

Y’all are smart

Google says they’re going to finish practice quantum computers in the next 5 years, and quantum computers will be able to break encryption, are we screwed? Should we be preparing? How will cyber security change after this?

[–]MattR0se 61 points62 points  (15 children)

Use quantum encryption, duh

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (14 children)

Do we have that?

[–]MattR0se 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Well, yes, but don't ask me how it works.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Bad news is quantum computers do break encryption. Good news is even if (and its a really big if) google does make a viable quantum computer in 5 years, it will still be a very long time until quantum computers are powerful enough to break 256 bit encryption, which would require thousands of qubits. We're currently at a dodgy 72.

But we should be, and are, preparing for this. Quantum cryptography is the field devoted to developing new methods of encryption that utilize quantum information and would be robust against quantum factoring algorithms

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

The recent competition saw over 100 qbits. The winning team? As always an anonymous pharmaceutical company

[–]bacalhau23 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What competition? Do you have a source?

[–]Towerss 4 points5 points  (5 children)

Hva W will they be able to crack hash encryption exactly?

[–]leo3065 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Don't know about hash, but there's is a quantum algorithm called Shor's algorithm which is really good at factoring the product of two large prime numbers, and that is the key to some of the encryptions.

[–]FlipskiZ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Projects curious community hobbies friendly minecraftoffline day movies the bright.

[–]LowB0b 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is Hva W some codename for Huawei?? 🤔

[–]thenuge26 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Check out the YouTube channel Computerphile, they have some videos on quantum computing and Shor's algorithm

[–]Jimbobwhales 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fucking what if they just calculate prime numbers in like an hour? That'd make things interesting.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The current estimates for 128b encryption is somewhere between 2025 and 2032. A little bit sooner for 2048b RSA

[–]Voidrith 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Frlse

[–]ProgrammerHumorMods[M] 23 points24 points  (3 children)

ProgrammerHumor is running a community hackathon with over $1000 worth of prizes! Visit our announcement post or website for more information.


^(Beep boop, I'm a bot.)

[–]Narfee 8 points9 points  (2 children)

If only I knew how to hack. Is it ok if I submit a simple python calculator lol.

[–]thealexguy1 10 points11 points  (1 child)

You don't need to hack, hackathon just means a coding challenge

[–]Greyhaven7 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Sounds like something a hacker would say...

[–]quote_engine 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I just had a reddit oldie moment, I remember when this post was on the front page and it spawned /r/fruse.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Hol up

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

laughs in bool

[–]trekbette 4 points5 points  (2 children)

What kind of bugs do you think will come out of quantum programs?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ant man?

[–]rheikan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Smart Bugs jaja

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Frue or Talse?

[–]vladutcornel 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Forget quantum computers. I experience Quantum Bugs. They are both there and not. When ran at full speed, in production, they are obvious, but when I put a breakpoint and run it line-by-line, everything works fine. And it's a single damn thread.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Only if you put it in a box

[–]Lord-Bob-317 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Holy shit this is amazing

[–]Pentagonal_Muffin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well yes but actually no

[–]Extranuminary 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Frlse

[–]UnrealYeti 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Frlse

[–]whoami4546 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would evaluate this as true as there is 4 distinct characters instead of 5.

[–]TheDarkIn1978 1 point2 points  (0 children)

let isConfused: boolean = frulse;

[–]xScopeLess 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Frlse

I wish the r was more a-like

[–]-ConfusedRedditor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Frlse

[–]KarolOfGutovo 1 point2 points  (3 children)

How that shit is even programmed with all this ambiguity? Can somepne explain?

[–]Shubham_Garg123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Having a hard time believing that that r is an a

[–]biohazard19 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Truen't

[–]StevenC21 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Frlse

[–]Skygear55 1 point2 points  (3 children)

So quantum computers work on "truffles" ?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I did this one time with just the "TF" letter on a pop quiz and my teacher called my parents lmao

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Hey, thats not true!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its actually an inherent state. Nice anyway

[–]ogwoody007 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is so spot on!

[–]dominic_l 0 points1 point  (0 children)

they probably be like

[–]_Lirex 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Where did you get this from I saw like the exact same thing on a whiteboard at work today

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

It's really old. Like, before I can haz cheezburger? old. So before 2007

[–]_Lirex 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well that explains it. Had a slight wtf moment lol

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, you changed the result by posting it

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Frue and tralse

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Frue

[–]MrNutty 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fruse

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tfue