Haimeng Zhao, Alexander Zlokapa, Hartmut Neven, Ryan Babbush, John Preskill, Jarrod R. McClean, Hsin-Yuan Huang
Exponential quantum advantage in processing massive classical data
https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.07639
Und dann folgt ein Muster, das man in naher zukunft wohl noch öfter sehen wird:
Der Präsident der entsprechenden Organisation putzt sich an den Arbeitnehmern ab, die die Artikel reviewen sollten. Bzw.: Aus dem systemischen Fehler von KI Halluzinationen wird d. Liability auf das Individuum gelenkt.
Most programmers are taught that L1 is the “top level” cache on x86.
It’s not quite true anymore!
Intel calls it the Decoded Stream Buffer (DSB), AMD the OpCache.
Only enough room for ~4,000 micro-ops, but there are interesting ways to take advantage of it.
Zumindest beim OnlineStandard beschleicht mich mittlerweile manchmal das Gefühl, dass bis zu einem gewissen Grad Themen gepusht werden, die starke Reaktionen bei bestimmten Lesergruppen auslösen.
Aber vielleicht muss einfach selbst ein Qualitätsmedium mit der Zeit gehen.
Biblically accurate Depiction of an Oracle in Complexity Theory
But how? Do Journals not have some automated system that checks whether the papers rederenced by citations exist?
I get how the content might not be what is claimed, but “Does this paper exist?” Really seems like a problem solvable by editors.
A hacker known as Martha Root broke in and deleted three white supremacists websites at the end of a talk during the annual hacker conference Chaos Communication Congress in Germany.
These two images of Chinese train driver Han Junjia were taken less than 30 years apart.
Transformative change is possible when it is relentlessly pursued.
You and me both
The Embassy staff of Germany, France and the United Kingdom sing Schedryk in the Kyiv underground.
Wonderful!
China now dominates global production of renewable energy technologies.
It makes 80% of the world’s solar cells, 70% of its wind turbines, and 70% of its lithium batteries, at prices no competitor can match.
🧪
www.science.org/content/arti...
Not to say there is no place for genAI, but there seems to be a trend to blindly apply AI to all kinds of products without any regards of UX, error bars, actual applicability, etc.
This trend is what people are sceptical of.
Can we please please please start articles about AI with a disambiguation about what kind exactly we are talking about?
AlphaFold is very much different from generative AI, both in the underlying technology and in domain it is used.
Will it be recorded somewehere?
What is your process like when reading very technical books like this? Do you take notes or read it like a novel?
Is it that a database is a glorified spreadsheet or that a spreadsheet is a glorified database?
I am not claiming that Sabine wanted to frame her video as such. But it can be done in this way, and in a time where science is becoming more politicized, someone will create this framing for it.
End of 🧵
What Sabine crucially left out is essentially the self correcting nature of the scientific process. The framing of the video essentially becomes "The scientific community knowingly wastes taxpayer money, deceives the public, everybody inside knows and nobody speaks up." 🧵
However, when speaking to the general public, filling in information which laymen may not know is important. In this example, it would be important to mention that the transfer of information is not instantaneous, and thus relativity theory is not broken. 🧵
The issue is the missing contextualization of the presented information. To give an example closer to my field of knowledge, I could make the truthful statement: "Instantaneous change of a quantum state is possible via quantum teleportation"
This is not a false statement. 🧵
Of course, criticism does in fact happen within the HEP community. Even as a layman, I was able to find multiple papers of the sort, for example arXiv:2001.00101
To be clear, Sabine never says this is not the case, but the omission of mentioning this is devastating. 🧵
In the video, Sabine presents this email as proof of the HEP community knowingly deceiving the public. The framing (knowingly or by accident) implies a consensus in the community to deceive the public 🧵
I will say that the idea of someone essentially sending a confession to a colleague they barely know in the hopes of stopping them from criticizing the field seems off to me. Despite that, lets assume the email is authentic and truthful for the remainder of the 🧵
First I want to point out that the authenticity of the email is questionable at best. Of course Sabine (rightfully) will not disclose the identity of the researcher, from the information she shared with us even she herself cannot verify the email address really belongs to that person. 🧵
Sabine Hossenfelders latest criticism of the field of high energy physics
A thread 🧵
With these kinds of claims I always wonder why the interviewers tend to barely challenge them. Like what calculations did you do to base your claims in? Where did you publish your results?
That future seems veeeery distant
NASA did a feature on me last year. It was up this weekend but now when you click on the link you get a 404 message.
To reach some consensus about the prospects of near-term (late nisq and early fault tolerant) quantum computing, we had a 3-day discussion event (“Quantum Now”) in Lapland with both optimists and pessimists. This continued at SeeQA 2024 in Oxford. See our conclusions here arxiv.org/abs/2501.05694
