(02-24-2014, 01:35 AM)teh_speleegn_polease Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2014, 09:46 AM)RachelB Wrote: [ -> ]lol no they shouldn't.
But everything would be so much more optimized! Just think about it! =P
More likely everything would be much less optimized, and full of bugs. It's ridiculously hard to optimize assembly better than a C compiler can.
We will be able to easily write an XBox One emulator for a quantum computer. It'll be as simple as writing a batch file which tells a real-time physics simulator to open and run an atom-by-atom scan of the XBone plugged into the mains and a TV. This assumes that someone can get hold of the scan, get hold of a powerful enough quantum computer for real-time physics sim on that large a scale, and that someone bothers to write a real-time physics sim capable of working on that scale.
chaosblade02 Wrote:I'm PC master race as well, but PC isn't going to get a lot of games.
I don't know where you're getting that idea from. The number of PC games released each year regardless of whether you count total or just AAA (big budget studios) games is phenomonally higher than any console.
teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:Well,
a) it's likely that, quantum computers or not, in 20 years there'll be a PS4 emu anyway;
b) the main reason for that actually being that in 20 years the hardware would be hacked - not because processing power of PCs would get high enough;
Even if there is it's highly unlikely that any games will be remotely playable by then.
teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:and c) there are still quite a few tasks done by home computers that would benefit from quantum processing. In fact, any task which can be broken up into parallel tasks would be sped up considerably by quantum computers. And those tasks aren't rare - think of modern GPUs with thousands upon thousands of cores. A quantum GPU would probably mean that display technology would be the main bottleneck in graphics quality. And of course, quantum CPUs wouldn't be useless either.
Nothing you just said makes any sense and you have no evidence to back up your assumptions. I hope you understand if I'm going to take the word of physicists who spent their lives studying and working on these things over yours.
teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:So, all in all, I'm not sure where the original statement sounds dumb or not. XD
It does.
teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:In 50 years, I'll cite the quantum PC in my office (or not). Let's just wait a bit till then.
No need. Just read about what we already know about quantum computing.
teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:I might have been generalising too much in my statement above though.
Yes.
I don't know about you guys but even if somehow by magic in 20 years quantum computers become small, energy efficiency, quite, affordable, fast, and genuinly useful (software that actually works and shows significant benefit over a tradional computer) I still probably wouldn't want to use them. The liquid helium isotopes needed to power the heat pumps are extremely expensive, don't last very long, extremely difficult to transport, and extremely dangerous to use. And even if you extremely careful and do everything right like a proper scientist while operating the thing it could still easily experience decoherence and become worthless in an instant.
I like how everyone is talking about 20 years from now and saying that computer processing will be done in the home / office.
It'll all be cloud based by 2020.
There's still enough inherent latency to that, at least in our current reality where data can't be transmitted faster than light, that plenty of processing still needs to be done on-device. You wouldn't want UI responsiveness, input lag, or audio latency to be dictated by network speed.
(02-24-2014, 12:06 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]Even if there is [a PS4 emulator in 20 years] it's highly unlikely that any games will be remotely playable by then.
I'd have hoped that in 20 years, it might be playable enough... But I'm definitely not an expert in this field.
(02-24-2014, 12:06 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:and c) there are still quite a few tasks done by home computers that would benefit from quantum processing. In fact, any task which can be broken up into parallel tasks would be sped up considerably by quantum computers. And those tasks aren't rare - think of modern GPUs with thousands upon thousands of cores. A quantum GPU would probably mean that display technology would be the main bottleneck in graphics quality. And of course, quantum CPUs wouldn't be useless either.
Nothing you just said makes any sense and you have no evidence to back up your assumptions. I hope you understand if I'm going to take the word of physicists who spent their lives studying and working on these things over yours.
Well, that's what I was brought to understand. From sources not exactly originating directly from researchers specializing in the field of quantum computing... Anyway, I'm a poleaseman (=P), not a quantum physicist, so I may well be wrong. Forget what I said in that case.
(02-24-2014, 12:06 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know about you guys but even if somehow by magic in 20 years quantum computers become small, energy efficiency, quiet, affordable, fast, and genuinely useful (software that actually works and shows significant benefit over a traditional computer) I still probably wouldn't want to use them. The liquid helium isotopes needed to power the heat pumps are extremely expensive, don't last very long, extremely difficult to transport, and extremely dangerous to use. And even if you extremely careful and do everything right like a proper scientist while operating the thing it could still easily experience decoherence and become worthless in an instant.
By definition, if they become affordable to operate at home no part of it will be expensive. And if you're supposed to change it often, it should be affordable to do so.
That doesn't mean what you say untrue, but rather means that quantum PCs aren't going to become fully affordable and reliable for quite some time. If they do, however (which
may never happen - IDK), then by definition it shouldn't be harder to operate than a traditional PC.
teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:then by definition it shouldn't be harder to operate than a traditional PC.
Ahem.
NaturalViolence Wrote:I still probably wouldn't want to use them. The liquid helium isotopes needed to power the heat pumps are extremely expensive, don't last very long, extremely difficult to transport, and extremely dangerous to use. And even if you extremely careful and do everything right like a proper scientist while operating the thing it could still easily experience decoherence and become worthless in an instant.
There was a time when people thought that nuclear technology was going to be in everything. Your home would have a nuclear reactor and we'd never need power lines again! Your car would run on a nuclear reactor and have a range of thousands of miles! There was even a concept car that was designed for it (with the cab as far away from the reactor as possible to protect from radiation, cute). A lot of people assumed it would become safe, even though it was dangerous by it's very nature. Surprise, nuclear technology isn't being used in every home. Why? Because it's dangerous and expensive and time will not change that. Quantum Computing is similar. The requirements to make it work are obscenely difficult and hazardous, and it requires massive operations to get anything done. Even the slightest mistake and it's all for not. And remember, despite all the research, they aren't working on anything beyond a bit by bit level yet (and even that is contested). For them to become safe would require a math/physics breakthrough and/or much more advance technology. I.e. probably well beyond our lifetimes. And then it could end up like atomic energy, and never be useful without massive teams to manage them and tons of safety precautions.
Even the earliest analog and digital computer systems were simple(ish) to operate. Giant behemoths of insane complexity, but anyone with a couple of weeks training could operate and maintain them safely and efficiently. Quantum computers need hundreds of
theorectical physicists with
doctorates to simply
operate these things. Not to mention the expensive exotic raw materials that are required for them to work (which time won't make more plentiful) and the hazards involved in their handling. Quantum technology definitely seems like it's following the nuclear energy model to me.
And that's assuming quantum computers ever become useful in general computing tasks. Quantum Computers do not work the same way that our computers do; it's extremely difficult to get them to do ordinary things. Most of the potential for quantum computing is in areas of extreme science that our current computing technology struggles with or simply can't do yet, like simulating other forms of theoretical physics (Boson Sampling).
(02-25-2014, 01:45 AM)MaJoR Wrote: [ -> ]teh_speleegn_polease Wrote:then by definition it shouldn't be harder to operate than a traditional PC.
Ahem.
[blah]
Sure.
tehspeleegnpolease Wrote:If they do, however (which may never happen - IDK), then by definition it shouldn't be harder to operate than a traditional PC.
My point was that NV wrote something like this:
NaturalViolence Wrote:Even if quantum computers become very cheap, easy to use, reliable, generally available, and useful for general computing, I'm not gonna buy one because it's gonna be expensive, unreliable, and hard to run.
Which is self-contradictory.
I didn't mean that quantum PCs WILL become affordable, reliable, and easy to use.
(Also, it seems to me we've veered a bit off topic here. Does it even matter in the Delfino Plaza section though?)
People are forgetting the following things which may be more useful for home computing:
Non planar geometries (functional silicon has been made like this) - eliminates many issues of having a massive CPU die because the edges of the chip aren't miles away, so the clock pulse will still diffuse to the entire chip within a clock cycle, and the latency of everything will be reduced.
Graphene (maybe less than a decade away) - should allow higher clock rates (because maximum temperature is higher) and maybe a slightly smaller manufacturing process.
Biological computing (we've hooked up worm brains to LEDs and made them flash or something like that) - May turn out to be great for massively parallel and pattern recognition tasks, and shouldn't be hugely expensive if it can ever be done at a useful level.
Molecular/Protein mechanical computing (CEO of Intel mentioned this as a viable possibility) - may be better than electricity, may be completely useless.
Using photons instead of electrons - I've not heard much about this in recent years, which would imply people have decided that quantum effects would take over, and stop your photon based logic gates from interacting with the photons reliably.
There's not necessarily nothing between silicon and Quantum
Great, you just listed another 5 completely overhyped technologies. This is not the "list random things which will not make PS4 emulation any easier" thread. And with that, I'd rather have people go on-topic again now.