RedEye9 wrote on Mar 29, 2023, 10:54:

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 29, 2023, 09:27:
Okay, so you are saying there are fully functional, operational quantum computers at NASA? If so, either the technology is WAY past where I thought it was, or my expectations for what a quantum computer is does not match the expectations of others.

It's research, except for the one administrative assistant who insists on using using her Dell Inspiron quantum computing laptop for word processing.
You're being trolled.
https://www.nasa.gov/ames/quantum-computing/

https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-quantum-artificial-intelligence-laboratory-quail

I'm trolling by pointing out they need a working quantum computer, which they do, to do research on whether quantum computers can be used for space missions? What would they use if they didn't? Bananas?

"The newly upgraded system, which resides at the NASA Advanced Supercomputing Facility at NASA's Ames Research Center, has 2031 quantum bits (qubits) in its working graph—nearly double the number of qubits compared to the previous processor."

That's one hell of a expensive banana!

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 29, 2023, 09:27:
Okay, so you are saying there are fully functional, operational quantum computers at NASA? If so, either the technology is WAY past where I thought it was, or my expectations for what a quantum computer is does not match the expectations of others.

It's research, except for the one administrative assistant who insists on using using her Dell Inspiron quantum computing laptop for word processing.
You're being trolled.
https://www.nasa.gov/ames/quantum-computing/

https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-quantum-artificial-intelligence-laboratory-quail

Okay, so you are saying there are fully functional, operational quantum computers at NASA? If so, either the technology is WAY past where I thought it was, or my expectations for what a quantum computer is does not match the expectations of others.

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 29, 2023, 05:44:

Razumen wrote on Mar 29, 2023, 01:23:

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 13:04:

Razumen wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 20:33:
Quantum computers already exist and work, in NASA, IBM, and so on. It has nothing to do with reliability at this point, but cost of production and size of scale.

Exist or are in productive use? Yes, I know people have built what they call quantum computers.

Are you suggesting NASA is investing and using a quantum computer solely for shits and giggles?

For research, sure.

Such research would be pretty pointless if they were actually unreliable machines.

Razumen wrote on Mar 29, 2023, 01:23:

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 13:04:

Razumen wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 20:33:
Quantum computers already exist and work, in NASA, IBM, and so on. It has nothing to do with reliability at this point, but cost of production and size of scale.

Exist or are in productive use? Yes, I know people have built what they call quantum computers.

Are you suggesting NASA is investing and using a quantum computer solely for shits and giggles?

For research, sure.

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 13:04:

Razumen wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 20:33:
Quantum computers already exist and work, in NASA, IBM, and so on. It has nothing to do with reliability at this point, but cost of production and size of scale.

Exist or are in productive use? Yes, I know people have built what they call quantum computers.

Are you suggesting NASA is investing and using a quantum computer solely for shits and giggles?

Razumen wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 20:33:
Quantum computers already exist and work, in NASA, IBM, and so on. It has nothing to do with reliability at this point, but cost of production and size of scale.

Exist or are in productive use? Yes, I know people have built what they call quantum computers.

I played one character to level 20 to get the cosmetic unlocks for release.
I never had to wait more than a minute to play the game. But ZOMG the lag. Rubber banding nastiness. Makes me wish for the days when diablo was a single player game that wasn't on blizzard servers.
Wonder if they went for a snowy first act to avoid all the cartoon color criticism they had from the previous diablo.

LOVED! the in game cut scenes, since my exact character and what they were wearing was in them. I know some games have done that kinda thing before, but this is the best I've seen it.

Also, blizzard admitted the drop rate for good stuff was boosted for the beta, in case anyone is expecting to see legendary stuff drop this much in release.

For like 1.5 hours (not nonstop). It was different and better than D3. It was interesting to see ingame cutscenes. Gameplay was mostly smooth, but ingame cutscenes got a little choppy. Interesting
that I had not run into queues! I did for a minute on Caturday mawny after 6 AM PDT. :/

Quantum computers already exist and work, in NASA, IBM, and so on. It has nothing to do with reliability at this point, but cost of production and size of scale.

Bill Borre wrote on Mar 25, 2023, 12:37:
Genuine question: Is Moore's Law as dead as he is, or is that too soon?

Yes and at the same time also no. It's complicated.

We think of transistors in terms of silicon because, for a very long time, that has been the majority of their physical makeup (we'll skip MOSFETs for the time being). There have been some germanium transistors as well but they leak worse than silicon so they're not widely used.

The problem is that the more we reduce the size of silicon, the greater the chance of current leakage and field array interference as we pack more and more of them in to smaller and smaller dies.

This is where the "yes...but also no" part comes in. We're reaching, or have reached, the physical limits of what we can do with silicon. However, we have not reached the limits of what we can do with transistors since they're actually really simple devices. To continue "shrinking" die sizes, we need to spend exorbitant sums in material science to devise a viable replacement for silicon that doesn't have the same leakage and interference problems inherent in silicon at smaller yet more dense scale.

So, in summation, we are very near to hitting the wall with silicon but transistors are far from being replaced.

/-=-\

Quantum computing is a lot like cold fusion and low inertia, high thrust drives. We keep hearing about it. We sometimes see lab "examples" but no one is remotely close to putting in to a production ready state that behaves in predictable manner. With current technology, it may very well be improbable to put quantum computing in a predicative, production ready state. That doesn't even include that whole new languages will need to be created, revised, and tested to meet the capabilities of computing at that level and be understood and interfaced with by humanity in a human readable form.

I'm with Tact. I'm not ever going to see it in my lifetime. If I had children, I wouldn't expect to see it in their lifetime, either. We're still using nearly 100 year old technology as "current" technology, today. See above in regards to transistors.

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 25, 2023, 17:56:

Schkorpio wrote on Mar 25, 2023, 17:52:
I'm guessing quantum computing is the next big step.

In which century? Certainly don't expect it to be significant while I am still alive.

A couple of decades away for sure. And in sure the AI that runs the matrix will keep you alive as battery by that point lol :-)

Schkorpio wrote on Mar 25, 2023, 17:52:
I'm guessing quantum computing is the next big step.

In which century? Certainly don't expect it to be significant while I am still alive.

I'm guessing quantum computing is the next big step. True parallel processing. I don't even fully understand how but it returns multiple results in one go.

On a normal pc if I wanted to check a phone book and make myself a list of names, you'd have to check each name one by one line in the entire phone book like this:

For each NAME in PHONEBOOK
{
If NAME matches "Sarah Conner" add to HITLIST
}

But on a quantum computer, it would check each name in the phonebook at the same time, making it as fast as only checking one name instead of millions.

Or think of it in chess. A quantum chess AI will know every possible move at once, instantly. There's no way even 1000 people could beat it.

Right now everything on a computer works in this one at a time process(even when spread across multiple cores), but it's so fast we don't notice, even to draw a single frame on the screen, pixels are drawn one at time to create the image in a loop similar to the example above. But presumably a quantum GPU would be able to draw all of the pixels at once. So it's millions of times faster.

I think we will probably see quantum chips as an add on to normal computers at first, kinda like how we send 3D maths to GPU instead of CPU, we'll send parallel type commands to the Quantum chip. It's at least a decade away probably two for home use though - assuming you'll even need home computers.

This comment was edited on Mar 25, 2023, 18:05.

It seems weird to intentionally limit access to the Diablo IV beta. I would think Blizzard would be eager to take advantage of player interest to actually stress-test the game's ability to withstand a rush of new players when it launches.

Surely you realize that testing the queue system is a part of this? In my experience, queue times are lower across the board than compared to last weekend (took only a few seconds for me right now, for example, in the middle of Saturday afternoon), which is not what I expected considering there are definitely tons more people playing. There's a bit more in-game lag as a result, although they have fixed some of the more glaring connectivity-related issues, such as getting stuck on invisible walls while transitioning between zones (when it shifts you from one server instance to another).

1badmf wrote on Mar 25, 2023, 16:26:
we've dipped below NM. both amd and intel are labelling their next gen cpus in angstroms, or 80A, etc.

Really? Interesting, I hadn't heard/read that. I assume x-rays are no longer sufficient, what are they using?

Finland, and their damn Mushroom parties, just rub it in why don't ya!

we've dipped below NM. both amd and intel are labelling their next gen cpus in angstroms, or 80A, etc.

I looked around a bit but couldn't find anything "recent". Found a 2018 article saying it might "fail" in 2025, but could continue to 2045. Certainly with 5 nm circuits we are approaching the limits of what we can do. *shrug* Even if Moore's Law has failed, it doesn't mean much.

Genuine question: Is Moore's Law as dead as he is, or is that too soon?