https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRmv4uD2RQ4
Well, /sci/? How accurate was Dudeweed's description of quantum computing?
Sounds to me like he's describing analog computing. Is analog data storage part of quantum computing? I would've thought the opposite; that at the quantum level everything would be... well, quantized.
>>8012084
It's more or less right -- it's obvious that someone explained to him since one of the reasons he was there was because of it, but his ability to succinctly turn the information he was given and impart it to someone else shows a lot of things about his competence as a politician.
Not like it matters though since his other skills seem to be burning millions on other things while in charge.
>>8012088
This tbqh
>>8012084
>>8012088
Of course he was given the information, and though his delivery was very eloquent I think it was pretty clear he had no idea what he was talking about. The bit where he invoked the wave particle duality really sold it for me.
Don't be an idiot. At best he's a better version of the same ol' politician. And in all likelihood it's not even that.
>>8012084
Oh, and if he really said that in the quote, he can go suck a fat one. That may be magnificently profound on the personal level, but at the political level it's fucking suicidal.
>>8012088
This. I figured he saw it as an opportunity to be funny rather than an opportunity to show off about stuff he doesn't know very much about.
He studied engineering for three years at Ecole Polytechnique, but he dropped out to focus more on politics. While certainly not an expert on quantum computing, he may have read a bit about it while at Ecole Polytechnique.
>>8012084
He seems to have the right idea that classical computing is just zeros and ones and that QC is a superposition of them but his explanation of it via wave particle duality is kind of off.
I don't mind though, his meme status might drive some more public interest in the field and then more people will look it up and get a proper explanation.
>>8012084
>at the quantum level everything would be... well, quantized
Nah, this is a common misunderstanding. You do get a lot of quantised solutions to simple problems, like particle in a well or hydrogen atom, but the quantisation is imposed by the boundary conditions. A free particle does not have quantised energy levels.
>>8012084
>I would've thought the opposite; that at the quantum level everything would be... well, quantized.
For quantum bits things are quantised, it's just that due to general quantum weirdness the bits can exist in a weighted superposition of the quantised states. That's what's special about quantum bits, being in a superposition allows them to process information as if they were a 0 and a 1 simultaneously. Although when you actually go to read the bits they will collapse into a 0 or a 1, the challenge lies in ensuring they're most likely to come out as the one you want.
>>8012084
a populistic way to dodge the question
>mfw be student who studies this
>mfw people keep memeing about "hurr durr more information encoded into single bit"
>mfw quantum computers are overhyped "cheap as fuck to compute probability model" computers and a better way to name them would be "deterministic" vs "non-deterministic" computers
>mfw "encoding more bits into same amount of space is a GIANT FUCKING MEME"
FUCK YOU TRUDEAU, YOU KNOW DICK ABOUT SHIT
