Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 15th Aug 2017 23:21 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems

This paper is a gentle but rigorous introduction to quantum computing intended for computer scientists. Starting from a small set of assumptions on the behavior of quantum computing devices, we analyze their main characteristics, stressing the differences with classical computers, and finally describe two well-known algorithms (Simon's algorithm and Grover's algorithm) using the formalism developed in previous sections. This paper does not touch on the physics of the devices, and therefore does not require any notion of quantum mechanics.

Some light reading before bedtime.

Thread beginning with comment 648020
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Worthless.
by Megol on Wed 16th Aug 2017 08:12 UTC in reply to "Worthless."
Megol
Member since:
2011-04-11

Hi,

This paper is written for mathematicians that have no clue about computers or programming.


And you have no clue about _computing_. This is the dumbest thing I've read today - and I have checked the news so this is really, really dumb!


Either show me code (preferably in assembly language) that does something that real software might actually want to do (e.g. something simple, like waiting for user to type in 2 numbers and displaying the result of adding them, or a silly bubble sort, or a function to do matrix multiplication, or code to send a query to an SQL server, or even just an industry standard "Hello World"); or admit that "quantum computing" (if it ever exists) is a worthless joke (completely unusable for all practical purposes).


This is just idiotic crap. There have been many important computers that can't wait for users to put in numbers. The idea that it somehow is a practical requirement just shows how thoroughly stupid and arrogant you are.

Learn something about computing before writing anything else please - this is embarrassing!

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Worthless.
by Brendan on Wed 16th Aug 2017 09:32 in reply to "RE: Worthless."
Brendan Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

This is just idiotic crap. There have been many important computers that can't wait for users to put in numbers. The idea that it somehow is a practical requirement just shows how thoroughly stupid and arrogant you are.

Learn something about computing before writing anything else please - this is embarrassing!


If you don't understand the difference between one of many possible examples of "something that real software might actually want to do" and an absolute fundamental requirement; then you lack the minimum amount of intelligence needed to form a valid comment.

- Brendan

Edited 2017-08-16 09:34 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Worthless.
by Megol on Wed 16th Aug 2017 10:19 in reply to "RE[2]: Worthless."
Megol Member since:
2011-04-11

Hi,

"This is just idiotic crap. There have been many important computers that can't wait for users to put in numbers. The idea that it somehow is a practical requirement just shows how thoroughly stupid and arrogant you are.

Learn something about computing before writing anything else please - this is embarrassing!


If you don't understand the difference between one of many possible examples of "something that real software might actually want to do" and an absolute fundamental requirement; then you lack the minimum amount of intelligence needed to form a valid comment.
"

WHERE THE F*CK DO YOU GET THE IDIOTIC IDEA QUANTUM COMPUTERS IN ANY WAY OR FORM ARE INTENDED TO REPLACE NORMAL COMPUTER?!?

They aren't. For traditional algorithms (many of which will _not_ be accelerated by quantum computers) they don't make sense. They would be more expensive, they would be too big (they require near-absolute zero temperatures in any practical system), they would be "clocked" much lower and they can't scale in memory or processing width. This is basics.

You are talking about assembly as if that is something defining a computer. It isn't. The ISA may be seen as something defining a computer.

Many computers have no assembly language. I have one standing ~5m from me right now.

And to continue there are many computers with no (human) IO at all. It have no bearing on how practical the computer is which anybody that have done even basic reading about computers and computation would know.
And there have been many systems when the main computer have no I/O capabilities in itself instead using secondary I/O subsystems for all external communication.

So I repeat: learn about computers and computer architecture before thinking a quantum computer have to be a replacement for a crap design like IBM PC compatibles.

Reply Parent Score: 2