The difference is that 10 years ago you needed billions of stable qubits, now you need 10k stable qubits.

And 10 years ago you had one or two stable qubits in the lab, now you have thousands.

Guerilla marketing?

I am! Tell me who it is, and I’ll kick their butts.

QC has well-founded expected applications within chemistry, factorisation and optimization. Anything else is hyperbole at this point.

No serious quantum computer scientist or industry person would claim QC “solves everything”. Who is “they”?

Don’t worry, linear algebra is also useful for other, less famous stuff.

To be fair, it’s way better than 50/50, but of course no guarantees still.

Careful research.

You can’t really call it slop just because you disagree with their views and representations of things.

Their stuff is carefully researched and sourced, human crafted and open to critique. Whether they’re correct in their assessments or not is of course up for debate, but it’s good craftsmanship and they show their work.

This “is kind of crazy,” said Harriet Lau, a geodynamicist at Brown University who was not involved with either study. If material is effusing from the core into the mantle, is the boundary between them “as distinct as we think?”

Sounds like there’s some interesting new science happening.

I quite like Quanta Magazine, they at least manage to write some pretty good articles on quantum mechanics which are both approachable by layman and accurate.