The Underscore Archives

On 26 Jan 2007, at 00:23, Tom Gidden wrote:

> On 26 Jan 2007, at 00:16, Steve Roome wrote:
>
>> What's all this stuff about instantaneous, I'm just not buying  
>> that ?!
>>
>> Nearly, maybe, but instantaneous seems a little like you'd have to
>> throw relativity out of the window and I don't remember reading that
>> being the case. Where did all the you physicist web developers go, I
>> know there's loads of you round dese parts, surely one of you must
>> have time to quickly run through how quantum computing is supposed to
>> work.
>
> Does anyone actually understand quantum computing?  It just seems to
> be "Er... yeah... and the qubits go in there, and hey presto!  It was
> behind your ear the whole time!  ...And the guy across the world from
> you was thinking of the number 5."
>
> I think the instantaneous thing is that it can do stuff with O(1) or
> better(!), while cooking dinner for you and doing your taxes.

Yes, that's the point.

But of course, xkcd has all the answers.

http://xkcd.com/c171.html

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson - Music photography
http://www.davehodgkinson.com/