Is Microsoft's Majorana 1 quantum computing breakthrough fraudulent? Top scientists say it's "not reliable and must be revisited"
www.windowscentral.com
Microsoft touts its Majorana 1 breakthrough as the world's first topoconductor, but some scientists claim it's unreliable.
  • cabbage@piefed.socialEnglish
    103·
    2 months ago

    This is a piece of alleged technology that is based on basic physics that has not been established.

    That does sound like a problem.

  • Optional@lemmy.worldEnglish
    54·
    2 months ago

    Check it, yo. In the 90s all the articles and rumors around quantum computing were exactly the same. Exactly.

    Whenever I hear about some new quantum computing breakthrough, I spend about five seconds wondering if it’s real and then I feel very nostalgic because no, it never is.

      • Optional@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        2 months ago

        Sure, sure and it’s interesting stuff. But not anywhere near useful in the sense people mean when they talk about computers.

        • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          5·
          2 months ago

          They are as useful as the Large Hadron Collider, or the New Horizons probe.

          They are instruments of practical scientific research. They may have some return in useful technology or not, but science is always worth it.

    • SmoothOperator@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      2 months ago

      Except quantum computers do indeed exist right now, and did not in the 90’s. Sadly, the hype and corporate interests still make it difficult to tell truth from nonsense.

      • Optional@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, sure they exist. Much like the ENIAC. And it’s cool stuff to work with. It’s just not anywhere close to practical. And it never has been.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    9·
    2 months ago

    Of course. Not a single quantum computer has done anything but test programs and quantum-specific benchmarks. Until a quantum computer finally does something a normal computer regularly does, but faster, we should simply ignore this area.

    EDIT: could the downvoters state a single occasion where a quantum computer outmatched a normal computer on a real problem. And with that I mean something more elaborate than winning naughts and crosses, or something like that.

    • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.worldEnglish
      19·
      2 months ago

      until it’s better we should simply ignore this

      That seems like a strange comment to make. How will it get better if we don’t spend the time and effort to make it better?

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.mlEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      That’s a different kind of quantum computer though (which i call the “real” kind). But that needs a while, especially with current risk-avoiding behavior of big corp. We are not even optical yet, not to talk about multitalents like graphene/silicene.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    2 months ago

    “Microsoft is slated to back up its claims and success in quantum computing next week at an American Physical Society (APS) meeting in California.”

    Well if they try to put on a show like Elon did with his dancing robots and what not we can be %100 sure it is a pyramid scheme.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.mlEnglish
    3·
    2 months ago

    a breakthrough type of material which can observe and control Majorana particles to produce more reliable and scalable qubits

    To… produce a more random random numbers generator?

    • erin (she/her)English
      1·
      2 months ago

      If true, this would in fact be a huge step toward quantum computing at scale, which would revolutionize computing. However, they’ve claimed this before, and have offered no evidence yet of their supposed discovery.