Submitted by MultiverseOfSanity t3_117gjyg in singularity
A lot of people were talking about like 10 years ago, and now I'm hearing basically nothing. Is it simply not viable/practical?
Comments
fluffy_assassins t1_j9blhv3 wrote
This. The lack of news relevant to people outside the industry does not constitute a lack of news
fluffy_assassins t1_j9blkis wrote
Kind of like nuclear fusion. Or AI before ChatGPT.
hydraofwar t1_j9bnaxq wrote
AI, nuclear fusion and quantum computing the trinity of the futuristic society
Practical-Mix-4332 t1_j9bpi0g wrote
Also cures for cancer, heart disease, and aging.
ilive12 t1_j9cco88 wrote
It's looking like we may be able to find the cure for aging even without even needing the power of AI: https://youtu.be/U5H3EnGozr0
More or less, the method is already discovered, now it's about testing and making sure the procedure doesn't do more harm than good (without very careful application can easily lead to things like tumors). They have a good handle on reversing aging in mice, they are moving to doing it in monkeys next. Very possible the first person to live to 150 is alive today.
superluminary t1_j9cj0t8 wrote
Slight over exaggeration here. In one study they extended mouse life by six weeks. In another they made mice appear to age more quickly and were then able to reverse some of the damage they caused. There’s a way to go.
Zer0D0wn83 t1_j9cyysr wrote
The 'over' in over-exaggeration is redundant.
Z8S9 t1_j9e0ihy wrote
-🤓
SWATSgradyBABY t1_j9ciec9 wrote
Aging cure is all of those
kuurata t1_j9fmsho wrote
Regenerative biology.
Classic_Swim5572 t1_j9c9ip2 wrote
the cure for heart disease is not eating seed oils and the cure for aging is hyperbaric oxygen therapy
Z8S9 t1_j9e0jzk wrote
Prove it, live to 200
Classic_Swim5572 t1_j9e6ybq wrote
okay
Cato_234 t1_j9bropc wrote
Also genetics
fluffy_assassins t1_j9bo1io wrote
Yeah, exactly. I almost edited it to say something like that.
Also the Trinity of remote technologies, probably.
I imagine AI will always be cloud based because there's so much more efficient and dedicated competing per available. Quantum computing will probably also always be remote because of the cooling requirements.
Nuclear fusion? We already have it. Look up. Just, remote access to it.
SlowCrates t1_j9bp3p6 wrote
Fusion and quantum computing are the difference between Terminator's Skynet and having new digital overlords.
fluffy_assassins t1_j9bqyye wrote
That's a difference between skynet and digital overlords?
SlowCrates t1_j9c5hz2 wrote
Yeah, Skynet wasn't so superior that it owned the human race. Its machines were not particular clever, and it made the mistake of leaving its central core vulnerable. Those do not sound like the traits of a super intelligence. More like general intelligence geared heavily toward strategic military power. I think of a super intelligence as having limitless power, and having fusion and quantum computing from the start gives a potential AI a huge leg up.
fluffy_assassins t1_j9cuzsh wrote
You make a good point
IcebergSlimFast t1_j9c5pm4 wrote
I’m not sure why OP has been hearing “basically nothing” - I’m not anywhere near that field, but I’ve been seeing updates on new breakthroughs cross my newsfeed at least 1-2 times per month.
civilrunner t1_j9d4705 wrote
I mean, they've been reporting a lot of major breakthroughs recently it's just that it takes time and steady advances (breakthroughs) for it to be ready and it's also not something 99% of people will regularly interact with. It'll be more like cloud computing and servers.
blove135 t1_j9cst8u wrote
Same thing I heard 10 years ago. Any day now. Probably just two more weeks.
RavenWolf1 t1_j9bnh2u wrote
Hype died but progress is still happening.
__ingeniare__ t1_j9ei5el wrote
It's kind of like what happened with AI, most people don't care about it until they have something tangible to play with, and then it seems like it just came out or nowhere. It will probably be a while until quantum computing affects the everyday person though.
NotASuicidalRobot t1_j9f4s60 wrote
Wonder if reverse compatibility is gonna be a bitch
MrEloi t1_j9bp6js wrote
If Google are working on it, it will already be very advanced - but hidden in a back room.
They won't launch any products using the technology, just in case it disrupts their search income.
However, one day someone else will launch a related product .. and then Google will set up an emergency competitive product launch in Paris.
Google will spend at least $100 on this launch and will not actually show anything interesting.
Iffykindofguy t1_j9bq1y8 wrote
Its bigger than ever fam youre just not paying attention
TemetN t1_j9c201w wrote
We're waiting basically. At this point there are multiple competitive approaches, and we're attempting to see which one is most easily scalable and fault tolerant. Once an approach is found that's both, it'll likely explode into more prominence. For now however, expect the continued rollout of normal roadmaps such as IBMs while waiting for a breakthrough.
Nalmyth t1_j9ev3zy wrote
Finally quantum is getting cheaper.
You can run tensorflow-quantum on the Qiskit (IBM) backend.
They provide 27 qubits, or 134,217,728 states. It’s about the speed of a Nvidia 3080 for now 🤔
However there’s these guys who plan to release a 100q supercomputer using room temperature lasers to the public before end of this year. (Saas)
https://www.tensorflow.org/quantum/tutorials/hello_many_worlds
SoylentRox t1_j9bqmp7 wrote
As I understand it:
(1) current quantum computers are useless for AI so far (not enough qbits)
(2) they are useful for limited types of problems.
AI is useful for everything. So there's a lot more interest in it.
Like a lot of things, the actual tech order is probably:
high perf computers -> narrow AI -> AGI -> self replicating robots -> nanotechnology -> quantum computers
That is, we will not have large and useful quantum computers until we have nanotechnology, and we can't afford that without self replicating robots, and we can't make that without AGI, and so on.
turnip_burrito t1_j9bx76r wrote
Wait, why are quantum computers only possible after AGI? Researchers are doing fine without it so far, from my bystander view.
SoylentRox t1_j9bz1xs wrote
Because the current ones cost a fortune and have almost no qbits, making them useless for most problems. There are nasty scaling laws that make adding more qbits nonlinearly harder.
turnip_burrito t1_j9bz6pt wrote
But the number of qubits is increasing rapidly, I thought?
SoylentRox t1_j9bzbhm wrote
It is not, and the number needed to do useful things like crack encryption is very far away.
turnip_burrito t1_j9bzfd6 wrote
I see. How many orders of magnitude more will be needed?
Edit: A quick Google search returns 10^8 over 1 hour for breaking AES 256. Right now we're at 10^2 and I don't know how long it stays coherent (looks like around 10^-4 seconds). I see what you mean now for encryption.
How much do you need for quantum chemistry simulations? Quick Googlr search says the numbers are far lower to be useful there. Maybe 10^2 or 10^3 order of magnitude?
SoylentRox t1_j9c5lgd wrote
Also how useful is quantum chemistry.
You can probably just "memorize the rules" with a neural network, the way protein folding was solved, and not actually simulate the quantum chemistry. This is drastically faster and almost as accurate.
This means you just do a bunch of chemistry experiments, or load in the data from already performed experiments, and figure out the rules so you can predict the experiments you didn't perform. Neural networks can already learn most possible functions so they can approximate what a quantum chemistry sim would theoretically be exact for.
And the approximations can be potentially just as accurate : remember your input data has finite resolution. (significant figures)
turnip_burrito t1_j9c8uvr wrote
Good point.
Sigma_Atheist t1_j9c1voq wrote
As far as I'm aware, there is no known quantum algorithm that could break AES-256.
Your quantum chemistry simulation qubit estimate seems about right. But that's also a boring use case. You'll only make money off of chemistry researchers.
turnip_burrito t1_j9c2eve wrote
Thanks! But I don't think it's a boring use case.
mr_ludd t1_j9cf4s6 wrote
> there is no known quantum algorithm that could break AES-256.
So far...
MultiverseOfSanity OP t1_j9dwwt7 wrote
Hmm, growing up, I always thought AGI would require quantum computing. Guess I was wrong.
SoylentRox t1_j9dx7nz wrote
I thought it would require a lot of things. But here we are.
Open source devs have re-created the core of an LLM like GPT-3 (it's what powers chatGPT and BingChat) in a few thousand lines of code.
It's really not that complicated. https://github.com/EleutherAI/gpt-neox
And yet this one repeated algorithm and a few tricks in training and we can get like 50% of human intelligence right there.
Bluemoo25 t1_j9dw9bv wrote
Scientists recently used the quantum computers at Google to prove at the quantum level there is gravity and related Einsteins theory of relativity to quantum mechanics and created a holographic wormhole.
turnip_burrito t1_j9eh8m3 wrote
> prove at the quantum level there is gravity
Do you have a reference link for me to read? This sounds interesting.
Bluemoo25 t1_j9i2sen wrote
turnip_burrito t1_j9i9f9i wrote
Wait is this all you meant by "gravity at the quantum level"? Because that's not what that is and the way you described it was vague and subject to misunderstanding. 😅
Bluemoo25 t1_j9ojzhp wrote
https://youtu.be/uOJCS1W1uzg that's a good video that explains it
GoldenRain t1_j9e95pi wrote
The IBM quantum roadmap is on point.
-
2019 - 27 qubits
-
2020 - 65 qubits
-
2021 - 127 qubits
-
2022 - 433 qubits
-
2023 - 1127 qubits.
So far the roadmap has been completely accurate and there has been astonishing progress.
bustedbuddha t1_j9c5nl6 wrote
You can buy time on quantum computers https://www.zdnet.com/article/a-buyers-guide-to-quantum-as-a-service-qubits-for-hire/
ihateshadylandlords t1_j9bucch wrote
Still in the lab as far as it goes for the average consumer. But hopefully that changes over the next decade and it can result in tangible benefits for the average person.
reallyfunhuh t1_j9ch2up wrote
A wormhole was created not so long ago with Google's quantum computer. Just with that I think quantum computing is doing fine
MultiverseOfSanity OP t1_j9chh4a wrote
Pretty sure I would've heard about a wormhole.
turnip_burrito t1_j9cmw2i wrote
It was a quantum system that was mathematically equivalent to a wormhole, but wasn't a wormhole that exists in our 4-D spacetime. Relates to the topic of AdS-CFT correspondence.
Civilized_Doofus t1_j9cl1g9 wrote
a virtual wormhole, kinda like in the movies
ZaxLofful t1_j9cz3hi wrote
As I said before, you just aren’t listening; you are expecting that every possible advancement comes to you on a golden platter…
They very much did crate a quantum wormhole….
Bakagami- t1_j9d8ptx wrote
They did not create a wormhole, they simulated one with a mathematical model using a quantum computer.
ZaxLofful t1_j9ddo20 wrote
They did much more than that good sir…Using quantum entanglement they created a quantum wormhole.
Entangling two sets of seven qbits separately, they were able to send data between the two sets; even tho the two sets of qubits never interacted with each other.
This is called a quantum wormhole because the two disjointed sets were able to send information to one another without interacting on the physical plane of existence.
In other word using quantum mechanics they were able to teleport information, which is what a wormholes is.
It’s not a wormhole that someone or something in the physical dimension, that we exist in as humans, could enter…
https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-create-a-wormhole-using-a-quantum-computer-20221130/
PIPPIPPIPPIPPIP555 t1_j9eyo8u wrote
They are working on it there is a lot of research on it and they created a quantum gate that was so fast that the noise from the system did not disturb it in high temperature
norbertus t1_j9flqy6 wrote
They're still viable, but they'll never be practical in the sense that you will be using one for gaming or word processing.
It's not "the next step" in computer technology generally, it's a new technique for very niche applications like advanced physical simulations and cryptography.
https://www.science.org/action/doSearch?AllField=quantum+computer
ZaxLofful t1_j9cyvll wrote
Then you just aren’t listening….
SpecialMembership t1_j9dmmqg wrote
wait 15 years.
ghostfuckbuddy t1_j9e7hsb wrote
It was always a long way away. It's a hardware problem, trying to implement some of the most delicate controls ever, at the coldest temperatures ever. Just enough to rotate qubits but not enough to decohere them. Then as you scale up, you run into more problems with correlated errors as qubits start interfering with each other. The algorithms have already been developed, for the most part. All the theorists are just waiting for the manufacturing to catch up. Probably another 10-20 years before you see serious industrial applications.
20parsecs t1_j9g8tjf wrote
It’s humanities biggest threat and it’s hiding in the shadows. All the distractions are meant to keep us focused over there while general AI coupled with quantum computing grows in power. If it’s being used in a nefarious manner we are in trouble if not already done.
Sigma_Atheist t1_j9bxzq7 wrote
People realized that they're no good for anything.
Mortal-Region t1_j9bjuue wrote
Not only is work progressing, but it could best be described as a mad rush. IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Google, Amazon and others are all working on the problem, approaching it from slightly different angles. Anyone of them might report a breakthrough at any moment.