66 pointsby donutloop18 hours ago3 comments
  • lukan12 hours ago
    "This study shows that quantum computers are starting to deliver value in real chemical simulations — not just toy problems or idealized systems."

    Looking forward towards it. But I am sceptical how much value exactly was added, but I lack the insight here.

    • 10 hours ago
      undefined
    • gsf_emergency11 hours ago
      Given that nobody, and I mean nobody [including Scott Aaronson[0]] understands Grover's algorithm[1], one can only be certain that value was only delivered to the stakeholders.

      The whole industry exists to prove Feynman, uh, consistent[2]. Didn't he say nobody understands quantum, but didn't he also claim that quantum computing can be useful?

      [0]https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611976014.5

      Although Scott is the most honest of them all

      [1]3b1b was in good company, not sure about now?

      https://youtu.be/Dlsa9EBKDGI

      [2]he demonstrated that not fooling oneself was of the utmost importance by continuing to provide the prime example of fooling oneself?

      • fxwin10 hours ago
        How does the paper from [0] show that Aaronson doesn't understand Grover's algorithm? What level of "understanding" are you looking for here?
  • tiahura10 hours ago
    How’s that Lockheed fusion reactor coming along?

    https://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyle/science/lockheed-s...

    • XorNot10 hours ago
      There was so much HN confidence that this would be the bold disrupter that would prove ITER was a waste of money by being the <buzzword buzzword buzzword> about that.

      Which isn't to the project was bad, but boy does a lot of stuff like this get announced and then people start making victory lap posts as though it's already succeeded.

      • datadrivenangel9 hours ago
        Gotta declare success to get the next round of funding
  • gitroom12 hours ago
    [dead]