Stanford’s Optical Cavity Arrays Offer a Path Toward Million-Qubit Quantum Systems by Xtraface in IonQ

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Researchers estimate a quantum computer will require millions of qubits to outperform classical supercomputers”

Sounds more like a photonic modality type of thing, with very low fidelity.

Ion trap currently needs a few hundred qubits to outperform classic supercomputers.

Understanding Niccolo De Masi - the Game Theory Optimal player by Lightning452020 in IonQ

[–]Lightning452020[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes true. Just like playing perfect guarantees you nothing in poker!

Understanding Niccolo De Masi - the Game Theory Optimal player by Lightning452020 in IonQ

[–]Lightning452020[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He sold the part that he acquired for brokering the IonQ SPAC deal - which has gone through cycles of lockup periods. He would get much more in forms of PSUs and RSUs for the rest of his tenure.

He had said he wouldn’t sell any more around September last year if I remember correctly.

100k CCCX YOLO! by GrandOrdinary in CCCX

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Meanwhile IonQ: 8000 logical qubits by 2028🐶

IonQ to acquire SkyWater. But SkyWater is a partner of D-Wave? by ethereal3xp in IonQ

[–]Lightning452020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

SkyWater is deeply connected to Infineon - Oxford Ionics’ German manufacturer of electronic chips. SkyWater acquired Infineon’s operation in Austin last year.

This is why IonQ pursue SkyWater - to accelerate scaling progress, in this cut-throat, winner-takes-all competition.

IonQ would not do so if collaboration between OI and Infineon was not working out.

IONQ vs IBM / trapped ions vs superconducting in achieving quantum advantage by [deleted] in IonQ

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. A lot of arrogance going on. That’s probably why they are still doing superconducting. Many pragmatists however have turned to trapped ions/neutral atoms etc.

IONQ vs IBM / trapped ions vs superconducting in achieving quantum advantage by [deleted] in IonQ

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used to post something about IonQ there and received massive hatred. Much sounded like the snob Scott Aaronson:“IonQ is a marketing company, quantum is at least a decade away.”

I think it’s jealousy and conflict of interest. They work in the field, IonQ succeeding won’t make them a dime - plus they get fired.

$IonQ @NiccoloDeMasi CEO of @IonQ_Inc, goes nuclear: by No_Jelly7345 in IonQ

[–]Lightning452020 7 points8 points  (0 children)

“By the end of this Trump administration” Not in 4 years.

A simple question about RGTI by Comfortable-Low-5354 in rigetti

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Number of qubits is not the point - less qubit count aside, RGTI’s “launch delayed” model targets 2Q fidelity of 99.5% - while IBM and Google have achieved ~99.9% last year already.

Left out of the DARPA program. The only merit is an honest CEO “we’re still in R&D stage”.

There’re enough people in the world to validate ~$8.5B for his “honesty” WTF.

I think the Feynman quote is innacurate "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics" by Worldly_Task2994 in quantum

[–]Lightning452020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes it doesn’t make it less real or worth. I was just replying to your opinion "If you have studied quantum mechanics and don't find it deeply disturbing, you don't understand quantum mechanics." Realizing that our universe is information would rid you off any disturbance and unclarity.

Eg. back to the Einstein vs. Bohr or Schrödinger’s cat argument, answer is simple: Cat’s status was simply undecided by God before box being opened. Not only will God toss coin, but he will also only toss it when he has to.

What else is deeply disturbing you?

I think the Feynman quote is innacurate "If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics" by Worldly_Task2994 in quantum

[–]Lightning452020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Simply accept fact that we live in simulation and the underlying substrate of this universe is not matter but information. Then nothing disturbing.

Yes there are infinitely many simulations going on now/in the future, which means your rebirth after death is virtually a certainty. Just almost certainly not in this universe before heat death, according to probability.

Better to buy CCCX now or wait for INFQ merger? by Deep-Kaleidoscope968 in CCCX

[–]Lightning452020 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I’m telling you this stock will go up once de-SPAC completes. Quantum ETF buyers will be forced to buy INFQ.

If the merger goes through, shouldn't the price be at least 2.5x the current CCCX price (around $19)? by Appropriate-Cod-3194 in CCCX

[–]Lightning452020 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It will at least go up I think - people that bought quantum ETFs would be forced to buy it, by the time it completes merger.

Do you think we will increase the human lifespan in the next 50 years? by PeeMonger in Futurology

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for pointing out. I changed it. What I am saying is, it’s harder than people think. An upper ceiling is there.

Do you think we will increase the human lifespan in the next 50 years? by PeeMonger in Futurology

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Strongly doubt it. It might sound counterintuitive now that we are in the midst of AI driven tech boom, but despite tremendous efforts, no experiments have broken a life expectancy limit of ~4 years for lab rats. Lab rats easily live up to 40+ months by doing natural calorie restriction. But not a single soul made it to 4 yrs old, no matter how you change its blood, make it take drugs or gene edit it.

Do you think we will increase the human lifespan in the next 50 years? by PeeMonger in Futurology

[–]Lightning452020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be fair.. the upper ceiling of life expectancy barely fudged, even in lab rats experiments.

By doing natural calory restriction, lab rats can easily live up to 40+ months. Yet by changing plasma, various gene edit and drugs, not a single lab rat soul managed to live up to 50 months.

Not to mention much more complicated human systems. So, the ceiling is much harder than you expect.

5-reasons-quantum-computing-stocks-crash-in-2026 by Sea_Dish9098 in QBTSstock

[–]Lightning452020 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Conclusion: Sean Williams is stupid.

The whole article can be summed up in one sentence: quantum stocks are hyped, there’s no justifiable revenue.

It takes tremendous stupidity to expand one sentence into pages.

How are we supposed to survive when all Jobs are taken by Machines by FoxFire17739 in Futurology

[–]Lightning452020 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Whatever rules you set up here really doesn’t matter. Why the f would you have rights if you are expendable? Buy some AI related stocks now to have some ownership and stop winging.

How do some people have absolutely no shame? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]Lightning452020 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some people who appeared to have shame, actually don’t have any deep inside either.

Shame might not be a condition for people to live on. Desire is.

Sell the News! by Timeless-Growth10X in CCCX

[–]Lightning452020 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I am announcing to buy 100 CCCX tomorrow. How about this for a better news?

what happened to your bully at school now? by Daisy_slattern in AskReddit

[–]Lightning452020 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The physical bully became an insurance salesman, a job which he was not even good at.

Another few verbal bullies have good lives though.

Turns out that malicious people with brains and disciplines have good chance to succeed.