I'm kinda torn on things. The other option in the area is a NoFrills, which is the Loblaws monopoly. They are Canadian, but evil as fuck.
At least Safeway has a functional union for the workers?
Otherwise I can drive 20 minutes (both ways) and go to a Co-Op instead of a 4 minute walk. I'm legit not sure which of the options is worse or best.
So that's the part that gets me stuck. There is no clear answer and it has no way to check the result as QC aren't capable of doing so (otherwise they wouldn't be using QC since they can only be based on binary inputs and binary guesses of true / false outcomes on a massive scale). How can it decide that it is "correct" and that the task is completed?
Computations based on guesses of true / false can only be so accurate with no way to check the result in the moment.
I made the attempt, but couldn't parse that first link. I gathered that it was about error correction due to the absolutely massive number of them that crop up in QC, but I admit that I can't get much further with it as the industry language is thick on that paper. Error reduction is good, but it still isn't on any viable data, and it's still a massive amount of errors even post-correction. It's more of a small refinement to an existing questionable system, which is okay, but doesn't really do much unless I'm misunderstanding.
The Willow (and others) examples I'm skeptical on. We already have different types of chips for different kinds of operations, such as CPUs, GPUs, NPUs, etc. This is just one more kind of chip that will be found in computers of the future. Of course, these can sometimes be combined into a single chip too, but you get the idea.
The factorization of integers is one operation that is simple on a quantum computer. Since that is an essential part of public / private key cryptography, those encryption schemes have been recently upgraded with algorithms that a quantum computer cannot so easily unravel.
With quantum computing, a system of qubits can be set up in such a way that it's like a machine that physically simulates the problem. It runs this experiment over and over again and measures the outcome, until one answer is the clear winner. For the right type of problem, and with enough qubits, this is unbelievably fast.
Problem is, this only works for systems that have a known answer (like cryptography) with a verifiable result, otherwise the system never knows when the equation is "complete". It's also of note that none of these organizations are publishing their benchmarking algorithms so when they talk about speed, they aren't exactly being forthright. I can write code that runs faster on an Apple 2e than a modern x64 processor, doesn't mean the Apple 2e is faster.
Then factor in how fast quantum systems degrade and it's... not really useful in power expenditure or financially to do much beyond a large corporation or government breaking encryption.
Well, I love being wrong! Are you able to show a documented quantum experiment that was carried out on a quantum computer (and not an emulator using a traditional architecture)?
How about a use case that isn't simply for breaking encryption, benchmarking, or something deeply theoretical that they have no way to know how to actually program for or use in the real world?
I'm not requesting these proofs to be snarky, but simply because I've never seen anything else beyond what I listed.
When I see all the large corporations mentioning the processing power of these things, they're simply mentioning how many times they can get an emulated tied bit to flip, and then claiming grandiose things for investors. That's pretty much it. To me, that's fraudulent (or borderline) corporate BS.
Yeah, most quantum science at the moment is largely fraudulent. It's not just Microsoft. It's being developed because it's being taught in business schools as the next big thing, not because anybody has any way to use it.
Any of the "quantum computers" you see in the news are nothing more than press releases about corporate emulators functioning how they think it might work if it did work, but it's far too slow to be used for anything.
We migrated a bunch of clients back when we took over for other IT. Cloud was slower, way more costly, less utilitarian, and gave less control. I have no idea why people switched in the first place.
I actually brought it up on an MSP subreddit back when I was still posting there and was relentlessly shit on.
If you run a small community like several of us do, even a small amount of downvotes can completely shut down a discussion from ever being seen by anyone else. It's a way petty assholes have of trying to kill conversation in small communities because they don't like something about what you said or how you said it.
If someone neither wants to contribute nor lurk, and merely drag down a community, they shouldn't be allowed to continue to be a part of it at all.
I dunno about it happening just as much on the right. I'm in Alberta and (for events only) still have to use Facebook, so I unfortunately see a lot of right-wing content. The overwhelming majority complain about left-wingers in broad sweeps, not people slightly less right-wing than them. The right wing is far more cohesive in my experience, which is one of the things that make them more dangerous. Their votes primarily mean "fuck the other side" in a way that left-wing votes do not.
Most of the insular leftist communities here on Lemmy also claim the moral high ground, but will ban light dissent. From FuckCars, 196, lemmy.ml, to some Vegan communities they all feel that they have the moral high ground and will spew bile at anyone with the audacity to agree with them, but in the wrong way. Their votes often mean "fuck EVERY other side except my small sliver of the left."
On the quiz, I got 84% NDP as my highest, followed by Green.
I personally can't stand purity testing and I see it frequently on Lemmy, and it nearly drove me from the platform when I first joined. One of the first threads I saw was (with no exaggeration) the single most insane purity test ask I'd ever seen up until that point. The thread consisted of "Come in here, tell me I'm right in exceptionally glowing terms, and tell me I will always be right. I will block and ban anyone from the instance if they write anything else or I get the feeling they are being sarcastic or not effusive enough in their praise."
I feel it is exceedingly harmful and drowns out better ideas while driving off potential allies.
I feel it happens more frequently online and in left-leaning spaces.
I run a managed service provider (basically corporate I.T.) and we deal with lots of medical & dental companies. We have yet to walk into a place EVEN IF THEY HAD OTHER I.T. SUPPORT BEFORE WE GET THERE that isn't actively bleeding mass amounts of data to China and have no idea why they are doing so. Some systems are even going as far as to send out screenshots and passwords.
We don't know why it's so prevalent in medical and dental, but it's probably not good.
It's kind of terrifying how non-private everything is in badly run companies that are more cost-focused than privacy-focused. Even worse, we've had some medical and dental offices refuse support because it was too costly (and we're on the lower-mid end of pricing), but having all their client data stolen was free!
I'm kinda torn on things. The other option in the area is a NoFrills, which is the Loblaws monopoly. They are Canadian, but evil as fuck. At least Safeway has a functional union for the workers?
Otherwise I can drive 20 minutes (both ways) and go to a Co-Op instead of a 4 minute walk. I'm legit not sure which of the options is worse or best.