• Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Obviously you are not aware a Quantum does not operate like a conventional computer. That’s fine. No reason to go further.

    • WildPalmTree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Oh, but I am. That’s why I said what I said. Even if they have one, it will be severely lacking; indicated by where public research is at.

      • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        You can’t even concede that Quantum computing is not convententual computing, why would your idea of research be valid?

          • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            The OP added convention computing to their verbiage because they knew what they said was not true of Quantim computing. Thus my response.

            Same as you adding the word public to research. Neither of us has any idea on the extent of research by Google, IBM and especially the NSA. Having worked in R&D before, I can tell you that not 50% is known to the public. The NSÀ, who run their own development and search-nothing at all. So, I consider your research argument faulty on its face…