[HN Gopher] First portable quantum computers on sale in Japan?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       First portable quantum computers on sale in Japan?
        
       Author : Anon84
       Score  : 47 points
       Date   : 2023-05-18 18:44 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (tech.news.am)
 (TXT) w3m dump (tech.news.am)
        
       | Fatboyrunning wrote:
       | Had HN been around when personal computing dropped, I imagine
       | that we could have made some attempt at a steel man argument
       | justifying such a purpose. Even if that argument was 'hobbyists',
       | there was something to be said.
       | 
       | With Quantum computing, what would that be?
        
       | snapcaster wrote:
       | Is this a scam? I'm not asking rhetorically I actually don't
       | understand what this thing does or who its for
        
         | version_five wrote:
         | I've been hearing a few apparently earnest mentions of using
         | quantum computers for actual application in the last bit. I
         | think that's BS, correct? There is no demonstrated thing that
         | current quantum computers are better at, save for possibly a
         | contrived problem? Am I missing some advance?
        
           | Yoric wrote:
           | It's still very much a research problem, yes.
        
           | staunton wrote:
           | I believe you're right. This product seems to be aimed at
           | education. I.e., people/companies who want to play around
           | with something resembling a quantum computer in order to
           | learn how they might one day be useful to them. Maybe buying
           | one also helps build an image of innovation and scientific
           | prowess.
        
       | NickC25 wrote:
       | I understand why certain tech companies such as Google/MSFT or
       | chemical research companies like Pfizer or defense companies like
       | Lockheed have quantum computers.
       | 
       | Why are these being sold for personal use? Running Shor's
       | algorithm probably gets boring after the second or third time.
       | 
       | Plus, this machine simulates up to 8 qubits - what's the point of
       | something that small?
        
         | Yoric wrote:
         | Best guess? Because simulating more than 8 qubits requires lots
         | of processing power.
        
       | AntonCTO wrote:
       | I won't believe in it until it proves to solve one of the known
       | NP problems in polynomial time.
        
       | pnemonic wrote:
       | But can they run Crysis?
        
         | defterGoose wrote:
         | No, but Skyrim is coming soon.
        
           | Drblessing wrote:
           | What about doom?
        
       | ryanSrich wrote:
       | Is there any practical use for one of these at the moment? As a
       | hobby dev, what could I do with one?
        
         | isaacg wrote:
         | They seem to be marketed for educational purposes. You could
         | simulate them in software easily. They could be useful for
         | research, but they're not directly useful for computing, except
         | as a novelty.
        
           | bbarnett wrote:
           | _You could simulate them in software easily._
           | 
           | Yes, just like you can simulate an ntsc interlaced screen in
           | software.
        
           | roywiggins wrote:
           | It even comes bundled with simulation software:
           | 
           | "Gemini Mini is a conditionally portable, entry-level 2-cubit
           | system... The device has built-in CASTOR software, allowing
           | it to simulate the operation of 8 qubits."
           | 
           | Not sure what benefit you get from using real qubits vs just
           | simulating them, even for educational purposes.
        
         | paulddraper wrote:
         | Kind of like the early computers.
        
         | defterGoose wrote:
         | Potentially, something like generating high quality random
         | numbers. This assumes a great deal about the fidelity of the
         | qubits and the control software though.
        
           | boothby wrote:
           | There is much better, faster, cheaper hardware out there to
           | generate random numbers. Using a quantum computer as an RNG
           | is akin to buying an airplane and using it to blow-dry a
           | carpet.
        
           | charcircuit wrote:
           | Modern processors already ship with hardware that enables
           | high quality random numbers.
        
         | sandworm101 wrote:
         | When your school is trying to sell itself, "we run a quantum
         | computer lab" is a good thing. These would appear the cheapest
         | means of qualifying that statement in your international
         | student brochure.
        
         | AlexCoventry wrote:
         | It's at best a joke, quite likely a scam.
        
           | anigbrowl wrote:
           | No, switch science is a legitimate parts distributor in
           | Japan, kinda like Adafruit.
        
         | nradov wrote:
         | You could probably compute the prime factors of 15 with one.
        
       | codekilla wrote:
       | The Quantenkoffer by qutools is an interesting kit for learning
       | about quantum stuff [1]
       | 
       | Also, Qiskit pulse was fun to play around with (haven't in
       | awhile, don't know what the current capabilities are) [2]
       | 
       | [1] https://qutools.com/quantenkoffer_science-kit/
       | 
       | [2] https://qiskit.org/documentation/apidoc/pulse.html
        
       | isaacg wrote:
       | The cubit/kubit/qubit typo does not inspire confidence in this
       | article. Here's the items for sale, in Japanese:
       | https://www.switch-science.com/search?type=article%2Cpage%2C...*
        
         | parl_match wrote:
         | For what it's worth, the site is not from an English speaking
         | country, and c/k/q are common points of confusion for ESL
        
           | dvh wrote:
           | Japanese also don't distinct v/b and l/r so love [lav] is
           | written as rabu (-u because with exception of -n they don't
           | like to end word on consonant), thus "rabu songu"
        
             | cubefox wrote:
             | Oh, I found the apparently quite limited number of Japanese
             | syllables interesting, and indeed:
             | 
             | > The basic units of the Japanese writing system are
             | syllables. Standard Japanese uses 100 distinct syllables.
             | Of these, 5 are single vowels, 62 are consonants combined
             | with a vowel, and 53 are consonants combined with 'y' plus
             | a vowel. [1]
             | 
             | Which suggests a relatively obvious possibility of a simple
             | writing system, where learning to write and read doesn't
             | require memorizing countless (logographic / concept based)
             | kanji. Though kanji seem to be older. So apparently the
             | syllable/character association was not as obvious as it
             | seems.
             | 
             | It's interesting that assigning syllables characters isn't
             | really practical in Germanic/Romance languages, as there
             | are far more than in Japanese. One source cites 15.000 out
             | of 100.000 possible for English [2]. It's actually cool
             | that someone came up with the consonant/vowel distinction,
             | ages ago, which saves tons of characters, and which proved
             | to be a big advantage (mostly over logographic writing)
             | when the printing press took Europe by storm, while it
             | flopped in China and Korea [3].
             | 
             | [1] http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/japan/japanworkbook/langu
             | age/l...
             | 
             | [2] https://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/courses/spsci/iss/week7.php
             | 
             | [3] https://erik-engheim.medium.com/why-didnt-china-become-
             | the-w...
        
               | thethirdone wrote:
               | > Which suggests a relatively obvious possibility of a
               | simple writing system, where learning to write and read
               | doesn't require memorizing countless (logographic /
               | concept based) kanji. Though kanji seem to be older. So
               | apparently the syllable/character association was not as
               | obvious as it seems.
               | 
               | Its somewhat shocking to me that you are not aware of
               | hiragana and katakana or at the very least romanji. They
               | are mentioned in [1] in the writing section.
               | 
               | From [1]:
               | 
               | > Kanji : Thousands of characters borrowed from Chinese
               | writing, each with a different meaning
               | 
               | > Hiragana : 46 "smooth" style phonetic symbols used for
               | inflected endings, grammatical particles and other
               | Japanese words
               | 
               | > Katakana : 46 "block" style phonetic symbols used for
               | writing foreign loan words, foreign names, and for
               | emphasis
        
         | explaininjs wrote:
         | _And they shall make a computer of Dimethylphosphite molecules:
         | 2 or 3 qubits shall be the capacity thereof, and a cubit and a
         | half the length thereof, and a half cubit the breadth
         | thereof..._
        
       | izzydata wrote:
       | At least the first home computer was actually useful.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-18 23:01 UTC)