Removed by mod

Yes, you little piece of shit

How do North Koreans win their country back?

How do Chinese win their country back?

How do Russians win their country back?

How do Hungarians win their country back?

How do Iranians win their country back?

How do South Koreans win their country back?

Yet y’all have an audacity to blame people from authoritarian states

Just voted for Cornel West. I love democracy

Just like me. Here I am a very toxic one, but in the real world I consider myself a nice person

američki

We’ve all been there, Hose. Take a rest and drink enough water

It’s my wishful thinking

You should really try cobol, lisp, ada, or erlang. Dead languages are the best

While you describe the way how error correction works, there are other factors you fail to notice.

It is widely known, that for each physical qubit T2 time decreases when you place it among other. The ultimate question here is: when you add qubits, could you overcome this decoherence with EC or not.

Say you want to build a QC with 1000 logical qubits and you want to be sure that the error rate doesn’t exceed 0.01% after 1 second. You assemble it, and it turns out that you have 0.1%. You choose to use some simple code, say 7,1 and now you have to assemble a 7000 chip to execute 1000 qubits logic. You again assemble it and the error rate is higher now (due to decoherence and crosstalk). But the question is how much higher? If it’s lower than your EC efficiency then you just drop a few more qubits, use 15,2 code and you are good to go. But what if no?

It was shown this year for how many, 47 qbits to scale? How could you be certain this will stand for millions and billions?

But who guarantees that ec will overcome decoherence, introduced by this number of qbits? Not a trivial question that nobody can answer for certain

If qbits double every year

And then we need to increase coherence time, which is 50ms for the current 433 qubits large chip. Error correction might work, but might not

Ok, I decided to dive into it today again and look what I’ve found:

1. They still demonstrate supremacy to each other proving that their setup couldn’t be simulated. These 433 and 1000 qubit processors are good only for one purpose: to simulate itself.

2. Photonic QC still estimates hafnian billions times faster; if only this mathematical structure appeared to have any practical meaning

3. They demonstrated that toric codes might be effective

1000 qubits? Where? Last time I checked it was 50 qubits for 200ms

How could you flip the burgers from home, Steve?

Be gay, do crimes

Why?

Buckle up, Baltic states