Then one evening, you hear a howl in the distance, and sure enough, on a hill overlooking the town is the clear silhouette of a large wolf. So you point to it — and all the same people laugh and accuse you of “crying wolf.”No, the wolf not there yet. Some are predicting 2030. I say there is no chance of that.Now you know how it’s been for me with cryptographically relevant quantum computing.
A comment says:
I see you’re following in the footsteps of Eliezer Yudkowsky, getting so frustrated at people not understanding what you’re saying that you resort to explaining the basic principles of rationality in hope that this will help.Meanwhile the NY Post reports:
The CIA used a futuristic new tool called “Ghost Murmur” to find and rescue the second American airman who was shot down in southern Iran, The Post has learned.I do not know anything about it.The secret technology uses long-range quantum magnetometry to find the electromagnetic fingerprint of a human heartbeat and pairs the data with artificial intelligence software to isolate the signature from background noise, two sources close to the breakthrough said.
It was the tool’s first use in the field by the spy agency — and was alluded to Monday afternoon by President Trump and CIA Director John Ratcliffe at a White House briefing.
Update: Sabine Hossenfelder Quantum Computers Just Got Much More Dangerous. She cites Google predicting Q-day for 2029, when quantum computers break popular cryptosystems.
Google has never realized its quantum predictions. I am glad to see it predicting 2029. That is only 3 years. We shall soon see. I say no chance.
Of course, that greasy little toad Aaronson deletes my comments no matter what their content. He anounced another faux-breakthrough where a team cherry picked a specific easy subset of a hard problem and made some grandiose announcement. I told him this -- "LO AND BEHOLD!!! I can factor large integers in polynomial time complexity!! But there's a caveat! The integer you pick must be limited to being a power of 2! ". And yes, that's basically the equivalent of what the original "breakthrough" was (as they all are these days).
ReplyDelete