Quantum computer on desktop size

[PeachGr]

 Summary

 Quantum computing is evolving fast and that article is about a version that is about to come in commercial use (unknown when), and it will come in a size of a penny.

QBits make no sense to me and more than 0 and 1 makes even less, but the article is about a quantum PC that will run on windows, Linux, iOS and some other variants

The use of those are purely for complex calculations such as chemical reaction simulations (as drug development and much more)

Quotes

Quote

  Around 50 quantum computers have been built to date, and they all use different software – there is no quantum equivalent of Windows, IOS or Linux. The new project will deliver an OS that allows the same quantum software to run on different types of quantum computing hardware.

 

My thoughts

 COVID-19 accelerated the process of computing for science. As know UK invested many millions in the past year for computing power for that use and Nvidia gave a multimillion pound computing unit after trying to buyout arm. I see that quantum advancement as an advanced F@H development, and yes, maybe even cryptocurrency will become a realistic currency .

P Processing power is something that we can never have enough

Sources

 https://www.redsharknews.com/quantum-computing-just-got-desktop-sized

[Bombastinator]

So about to but unknown when.  Sounds like someone developed an OS that they want other people doing such research to use. Heh.  I’m sure that group does.  As does every single other group also developing such.  I suspect every single other system makes allowances for use by others.   No leaps in either getting quantum computing out of the exotic liquified gas cooling group or making it actually useful beyond theoretically.   Research is this jealous thing quite often.  scientists who get  their hands on a piece of data, be it a bone or manuscript or whatnot often guard it with fantastic jealousy until they have wrung every drop possible out of it.  Iirc the group that got ahold of the Dead Sea scrolls kept them secret for like a decade and it took legal action to make them relinquish any data.

Edited July 7, 2021 by Bombastinator

[CarlBar]

The title is complete clickbait and bears zero resemblance to whats actually happening. This is about a attempt to develop a unified quantum computer OS, not bring quantum computing to the PC desktop and PC desktop OS's.

[PeachGr]

Yeah

14 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Sounds like someone developed an OS that they want other people doing such research to use. Heh.

It feels like it's always like that on symbiotic relationships. O.S. are successful or failures based on how many developers can find uses on it or electric cars need charging stations and vise versa. Those things take time. The interesting part is that they somehow work on x86 and that's why I found the article interesting. It will most probably start on ASIC like device, unchallenged on some uses, useless on others.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

So about to but unknown when.  Sounds like someone developed an OS that they want other people doing such research to use. Heh.  I’m sure that group does.  As does every single other group also developing such.  I suspect every single other system makes allowances for use by others.   No leaps in either getting quantum computing out of the exotic liquified gas cooling group or making it actually useful beyond theoretically.   

QCs will likely never be useful in a home even if they do work around the current drawbacks (like size and -200c gas to cool) since the types of task they excel at are not what people need at home.

[PeachGr]

36 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

QCs will likely never be useful in a home even if they do work around the current drawbacks (like size and -200c gas to cool) since the types of task they excel at are not what people need at home.

On the other hand, if you use cloud computing, you kinda have quantum computing at home

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, PeachGr said:

Yeah

It feels like it's always like that on symbiotic relationships. O.S. are successful or failures based on how many developers can find uses on it or electric cars need charging stations and vise versa. Those things take time. The interesting part is that they somehow work on x86 and that's why I found the article interesting. It will most probably start on ASIC like device, unchallenged on some uses, useless on others.

The history of DOS and cp/m and microsoft and IBM is pretty storied. I’m not sure it’s a positive comparison.  It was quite borgiaesque.  UNIX would be a more positive one.  It happened because of some pretty unique circumstances.  There are some basic similarities in that there are an bunch of different kinds of somewhat similar hardware each being developed by a different group.  Unix had a killer app though. If one gets developed for this OS and it is as easy to apply to various disparate types of hardware as UNIX was it’s not impossible it could happen again.  If someone else develops a killer app though it could just as well be their OS. I doubt this particular one is particularly unique. I also see no evidence that anyone has even figured out anything fundamentally useful to do with quantum computers yet. It all seems to be what they could become capable of rather than what they are capable of.  It is likely too early.  I doubt various researchers will simply start using someone else’s OS just because.  There needs to be a good reason to do so and right now I don’t see one.  An OS more or less can’t be a killer app by itself. There has to be an app for it to be killer.

[Master Disaster]

18 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

The history of DOS and cp/m and microsoft and IBM is pretty storied. I’m not sure it’s a positive comparison.  It was quite borgiaesque.  UNIX would be a more positive one.  It happened because of some pretty unique circumstances.  There are some basic similarities in that there are an bunch of different kinds of somewhat similar hardware each being developed by a different group.  Unix had a killer app though. If one gets developed for this OS and it is as easy to apply to various disparate types of hardware as UNIX was it’s not impossible it could happen again.  If someone else develops a killer app though it could just as well be their OS. I doubt this particular one is particularly unique. I also see no evidence that anyone has even figured out anything fundamentally useful to do with quantum computers yet. It all seems to be what they could become capable of rather than what they are capable of.  It is likely too early.  I doubt various researchers will simply start using someone else’s OS just because.  There needs to be a good reason to do so and right now I don’t see one.  An OS more or less can’t be a killer app by itself. There has to be an app for it to be killer.

Remember the old (and actually fake) Bill Gates quote "No one will ever need more than 64kb of RAM"?

 

Same thing applies here, right now QCs are huge, require monstrous cooling rigs and have very little use but as time moves on and we start to understand what the tech can and cannot do we will start finding uses which will push the industry forward.

 

We already have some proposed use cases, for example breaking encryption algorithms, brute forcing scientific simulations with trillions of data points, working out multiple possibilities from the same starting point in the blink of an eye etc. I'd imagine they'll eventually start being used in AI design as well.

 

Essentially they are very good at doing HUGE amounts of calculations VERY quickly and that has the potential to be very useful.

[Sauron]

3 hours ago, PeachGr said:

the article is about a quantum PC that will run on windows, Linux, iOS and some other variants

No, it is not. The quote you posted specifically mentions that there won't be an equivalent to any of these but rather about developing a new quantum computer operating system.

[Bananasplit_00]

Idk what the silicon they are holding in that picture is, but man that's a really pretty piece and I want it

[WolframaticAlpha]

4 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

QCs will likely never be useful in a home even if they do work around the current drawbacks

well, that's what they said of the mainframes in the 50's.

 

But seriously, it will most likely work as a coprocessor sitting in some remote destination if it is ever used in consumer space.

[StDragon]

3 hours ago, PeachGr said:

On the other hand, if you use cloud computing, you kinda have quantum computing at home

Such cloud services would be both expensive and highly regulated given the theoretical cracking ability they could provide to both criminals and nation state adversaries.

 

No, I don't see this being available to your average business let alone residential use.

[Forbidden Wafer]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

No, it is not. The quote you posted specifically mentions that there won't be an equivalent to any of these but rather about developing a new quantum computer operating system.

Which is pretty much nonsense.  Everybody in the field knows QC will just be used as an accelerator for conventional computing. At most, they just need a new Linux subsystem. 

[Taf the Ghost]

6 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

QCs will likely never be useful in a home even if they do work around the current drawbacks (like size and -200c gas to cool) since the types of task they excel at are not what people need at home.

We'll get room temperature stable super conductors before "home use" QCs. 

[Taf the Ghost]

1 hour ago, huilun02 said:

I WAS PROMISED FLYING CARS FOR CONSUMERS

 

WHERE ARE THEY???

 

OUT WITH IT

You can actually buy a flying car. There's a few around in the USA. You need something like 7 different licenses to operate and FAA cleared flight plan to take off.

[Master Disaster]

19 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

We'll get room temperature stable super conductors before "home use" QCs. 

And graphene will get used in something useful.

[Murasaki]

7 hours ago, CarlBar said:

The title is complete clickbait and bears zero resemblance to whats actually happening. This is about a attempt to develop a unified quantum computer OS, not bring quantum computing to the PC desktop and PC desktop OS's.

As if ill ever afford it xD

[Mark Kaine]

 

8 hours ago, PeachGr said:

The use of those are purely for complex calculations such as chemical reaction simulations

Wait, so can it run Doom or no?

 

7 hours ago, CarlBar said:

The title is complete clickbait

Oh… 

 

Tbf, I was confused because the prof on yt said it'll never run Doom…

[Taf the Ghost]

43 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

And graphene will get used in something useful.

CARBON NANOTUBES, BRO!

[wanderingfool2]

10 hours ago, PeachGr said:

article is about a quantum PC that will run on windows, Linux, iOS and some other variants

In general this line is wrong.  The article isn't about a quantum PC that will run Windows, it's about a new OS that they hope will be used for quantum computers (i.e. more standardized API's and such).

 

With that said as well, this article to me screams as a startup trying to make attention to be able to build up capital (or in general investors).  Given the lack of information in the article, my assumption would be that they are just in the theoretical part anyways.

[Bombastinator]

9 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Remember the old (and actually fake) Bill Gates quote "No one will ever need more than 64kb of RAM"?

 

Same thing applies here, right now QCs are huge, require monstrous cooling rigs and have very little use but as time moves on and we start to understand what the tech can and cannot do we will start finding uses which will push the industry forward.

 

We already have some proposed use cases, for example breaking encryption algorithms, brute forcing scientific simulations with trillions of data points, working out multiple possibilities from the same starting point in the blink of an eye etc. I'd imagine they'll eventually start being used in AI design as well.

 

Essentially they are very good at doing HUGE amounts of calculations VERY quickly and that has the potential to be very useful.

Oh I don’t disagree that they can or will become useful, and if something useful get developed that runs on that OS but not others I think there will very possibly be a rush to that OS.  Quantum computers are a bit like where digital computers were in the 30’s or 40’s. Possibly 50’s in some ways.  The comparison is not exact.  They’re Immense devices requiring massive maintainance that don’t really have much in the way of application..yet.  World war2 rolled around and suddenly there was a use  for computers -breaking encryption.  The US and Britain really really needed to break some codes and work proceeded forward at a frantic pace.  It never really stopped because new really useful things kept on being found for increasingly complex and easy to deal with machines.  This could well happen for quantum computers.  It’s enigma moment hasn’t happened yet though.  In some ways UNIX was it’s own killer app simply because it worked so well and made hardware that wasn’t useful useful.  If this OS can do that there won’t be any stopping it.  I haven’t seen  that occurring though.  There has to be A use first.  Right now there isn’t enough reason for devs for each machine to not simply develop their own.  One thing we saw with mainframes and the birth of Unix, is that many of the OSes those independent devs developed were crap, and if they stopped developing for them the hardware became useless.  That point hasn’t yet been reached either. Groups are still pouring money into developing these things, each hoping that THEY will be the one to make the breakthrough.  This group seems to be saying. “No.  It’s the 60’s” I’m not sure it is.  Much less the 70’s.  I’ve got a mushroom’s eye view though.  There were wildly different OSes than UNIX developed. For Unix everything is a file.  This was a major breakthrough at the time and what allowed it to be adapted to so many machines.  There was also plan9 from bell labs though, in which everything was a stream. That went nowhere even though it’s potentially more useful. 

Edited July 7, 2021 by Bombastinator

[Bombastinator]

11 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

QCs will likely never be useful in a home even if they do work around the current drawbacks (like size and -200c gas to cool) since the types of task they excel at are not what people need at home.

There is a never say never thing about that one.  It’s hard to know what the future may bring. Cyclops was developed exclusively for breaking encryption and used paper tape that underwent so much friction it set itself on fire.  I’ve got one of its descendants in my pocket though.  There are a bunch of big big hurdles that need to be jumped first though and there is no guarantee that they will be.

[Spotty]

Thread cleaned. Please stay on topic.

[Bombastinator]

On 7/7/2021 at 9:35 AM, Taf the Ghost said:

CARBON NANOTUBES, BRO!

Nanotubes were not considered to be graphene really until very recently.  Generally the reverse was true with people calling graphene research an outgrowth of the whole buckytubes thing.  There are companies claiming graphene ribbon use in some rechargeable batteries but it may just be marketing garbage. The rechargeable battery market has become something of a cesspool with a lot of marketing claims that don’t hold up in reality.  Graphene is a “new hotness” much like radium was near the turn of the 20th century and got put in all sorts of things where it didn’t actually do much (except be incredibly poisonous but that’s a different thing)

Graphene does conduct electricity well, and I therefore suspect research into incorporation into computers has at least been done.  I haven’t heard much about actual use though which may or may not mean anything.  Buckytubes had a lot of promise but the issue was they couldn’t be made very long.  Industrially the maximum seems so far to be millimeters, though they have been grown longer in labs. This seems to be increasing slowly.  If they ever do reach arbitrary length they could be massively revolutionary.  The only major industrial use of buckytubes I know of is “fastcaps” which are ultracapacitors that while they can’t actually store more energy than traditional ultracapacitors which have been around for many years now, will react significantly faster.

The word “graphene” seems to be supplanting the term “nanotube” in the lexicon of mountebanks though “nano” remains fresh.  “Nano” just mean small though, so anything using small anything seems to get it tacked on.  The result so far seems to be the terms “nano” and “graphene” have become words to be wary of.  “Quantum” has also joined that pile. None of the terms actually mean “of great specialness” though it seems to be how they are occasionally used. 

[Taf the Ghost]

45 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Nanotubes were not considered to be graphene really until very recently.  Generally the reverse was true with people calling graphene research an outgrowth of the whole buckytubes thing.  There are companies claiming graphene ribbon use in some rechargeable batteries but it may just be marketing garbage. The rechargeable battery market has become something of a cesspool with a lot of marketing claims that don’t hold up in reality.  Graphene is a “new hotness” much like radium was near the turn of the 20th century and got put in all sorts of things where it didn’t actually do much (except be incredibly poisonous but that’s a different thing)

Graphene does conduct electricity well, and I therefore suspect research into incorporation into computers has at least been done.  I haven’t heard much about actual use though which may or may not mean anything.  Buckytubes had a lot of promise but the issue was they couldn’t be made very long.  Industrially the maximum seems so far to be millimeters, though they have been grown longer in labs. This seems to be increasing slowly.  If they ever do reach arbitrary length they could be massively revolutionary.  The only major industrial use of buckytubes I know of is “fastcaps” which are ultracapacitors that while they can’t actually store more energy than traditional ultracapacitors which have been around for many years now, will react significantly faster.

The word “graphene” seems to be supplanting the term “nanotube” in the lexicon of mountebanks though “nano” remains fresh.  “Nano” just mean small though, so anything using small anything seems to get it tacked on.  The result so far seems to be the terms “nano” and “graphene” have become words to be wary of.  “Quantum” has also joined that pile. None of the terms actually mean “of great specialness” though it seems to be how they are occasionally used. 

Was making a joke about tech in the pipeline but that's been in the pipeline for a very, very long time.