The power of quantum computing is constructing the solution to a problem out of an interference pattern. Classical probabilities don’t interfere, but quantum probabilities do. Loosely, quantum probabilities can be constructed to cancel, since their amplitudes can be negative.

Shor’s algorithm works on the quantum Fourier transform. The quantum Fourier transform works because you can pick a frequency out of a signal using a “test wave.” The test wave can select out the amplitude of interest because the information of the test wave constructively interferes, whereas every other frequency cancels. This is the interference effect that can only happen with complex/negative probability amplitudes.

The communication here is clear as mud. WHICH quantum systems? D-Wave? We know D-Wave is a joke!

The communication is in a superstate that has yet to collapse.

I have a 556 and 547 that I still use. They work fine. They slowed down a bit from the resistors drifting but whatever. Still very fun to use and they heat the workspace in the winter.

doom and gloom over the promise of free busses is a wild level of cynicism

Even my loved ones express skepticism, but upon deeper probing it's because they don't want to be let down.

Mamdani took a lot of heat for proposing something that isn't that feasible.

From the article someone linked to below:

Speaking on Oct. 30, MTA chairman and CEO Janno Lieber didn't seem amenable to the idea of making buses free for all riders.

"I want to make sure that people of limited income get priority in this discussion, that we're not just giving a ton of money to people who are riding the 104 on the Upper West Side, where I grew up, the bus on Broadway," Lieber said.

So the guy who might hold sway, hasn't been convinced yet its something he would be immediately on board with. The MTA is also still struggling financially, so losing even more revenue by giving away free bus trips isn't something the MTA will be cool with.

And then of course what nobody wants to talk about is how they would offset the losses in fair revenues? Why increases taxes of course:

Mamdani told CBS New New York back in September that he would pay for free buses, along with his other democratic socialist policies, in part, by increasing the corporate tax rate to 11.5% -- the same as New Jersey -- and instituting a flat 2% tax rate for individuals earning $1 million or more.

"My vision for making the most expensive city in the United States of America affordable is actually one that benefits all of us," he said.

What's your objection to the tax increase. I think people are talking about it plenty and it seems generally non-objectionable.

The other problem with free busses is that in NYC people of all income brackets use public transit. That’s rare amongst cities. New Yorkers know that the subway is way faster than a chauffeured SUV for most trips and so you’ll see millionaires riding alongside those of far less means. Folks of all means also use the busses.

The MTA needs money and so making busses free for everyone is silly when many riders can certainly afford to pay. Various means tested approaches are in place and are the sort of thing that generally gets broader support.

The whole “tax the rich” line makes for good stump speeches but doesn’t work in practice. The rich have good accountants that let people avoid most of these ideas.

It hit diminishing returns for most things long, long ago, but this physics is directly related to stuff in quantum computing and studying gravity.

The only things that are weird in math are things that would not be expected after understanding the definitions. A lot of the early hurdles in mathematics are just learning and gaining comfort with the fact that the object under scrutiny is nothing more than what it's defined to be.

I’m not sure what you mean — transmons are lithographically defined on a chip. They’re fixed in place. Usually they’re coupled/entangled using a tunable coupler

I don't know how else to say it but you just have to do it. It's like asking how to get good at running. You run.

I get the sense that the Scandinavian minimalism thing has worn too heavy on everyone and now we're taking a collective step back to explore things that are a bit more fun and maximalist. So yeah, maybe a little more skeuomorphism but done differently? That was a fun era!

> I get the sense that the Scandinavian minimalism thing has worn too heavy on everyone

As a Scandinavian: I don't feel like we tried that since Braun. Apple has tried to mimic a Scandinavian sort of minimalism, but only in appearance. The iPhone UI is way to busy and is to hard to navigate for me to classify it as minimalism.