A little looser
Oldrich Novak,2021-11-21 13:20:24
Quantum computers are inherently probabilistic machines. They can be used well where a complex problem with many variables and options that apply at the same time needs to be addressed.
Now I’m sorry, after the Black Fox (I recommend) I was caught “writing” 😉
But so far it’s the same as buying a 750t Liebherr instead of a palletist. Yes, he will pick up a pallet once in a whole month, but that’s about it. Similarly, the choice will be whether to use the table value PÃ 3.14159 or the quantum presentation to five billion decimal places for the production process of the CNC milling machine. So I would definitely not be afraid of their “supremacy” in CAD or office Excel. To this day, there is also no consensus on what the equivalent of a common programming language might look like for them. *)
And with classic computers moving forward in AI analysis, what seems unsolvable today may well look different tomorrow. And if we come across a problem that could be solved in billions of years, then we may not even need to solve it, or we will find another way. Because many “tasks” for quantum computers were created just to show what they can do without the need for its application.
At the same time, a completely cardinal question arises: how to verify that what the qbazmek calculates is / will be true? Well, in practice (for example with anti-cancer drugs, energy flow control systems …) But does anyone want to risk that it suddenly stumbles and throws a bad result and we don’t know it in time? With the classic model, you can “more or less” simulate what it will do when overloaded or some excess. But how to verify it with quantum computers?
So maybe only on another quantum computer. But this will only work if what I write above is implemented – cross-platform standardized algorithms. So far, perhaps the Israeli QUA on QOP (?) Or at least Q-score (?) I don’t know, maybe it would like an article on how quantum computers are programmed. It would certainly be an interesting insight into the issue, which is a bit of a showcase for the top results of terrestrial science.
There is also fun on the topic. For example, the Korean quantum random number generator has radioactive nickel in its core. Its function would be easily taken over by any vacuum diode, easily aged 40 years. Well, they have a quantum generator 🙂
And finally, to entertain the (not only) conspirators. Some not-so-public (and of course more / less not / credible) source mentioned that a quantum machine capable of meaningfully breaking the security of NSA computers would cost about 10,000 times more expensive than hiring a reasonable number of employees to bring information. **) So we will communicate superhyperult safely through quantum channels, but if we do not completely exclude people, we will still be where we are today :-)))
*) and now imagine that you have soft made into your qsystems, made by someone else who, thanks to international use, is WORLDWIDE available to find bugs and weaknesses. Oops, ideal condition not only for industrial espionage or influencing processes, but also for terrorists, etc …
**) completely out of the question, but telling: the sphere is constantly addressing how to specify how many paid informants are real and how many deliberately pushed the system to “sensitive” deliberate but deliberately distorting information from the enemy. Simply put, Bond in a live broadcast.
– .
