this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
413 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

66465 readers
4549 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (6 children)

Of course. Not a single quantum computer has done anything but test programs and quantum-specific benchmarks. Until a quantum computer finally does something a normal computer regularly does, but faster, we should simply ignore this area.

EDIT: could the downvoters state a single occasion where a quantum computer outmatched a normal computer on a real problem. And with that I mean something more elaborate than winning naughts and crosses, or something like that.

[–] Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (4 children)

until it's better we should simply ignore this

That seems like a strange comment to make. How will it get better if we don't spend the time and effort to make it better?

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

With quantum computing if you ignore it you are simultaneously not ignoring it?

[–] MrBlack@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

I don't think so, but yes.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)