Slashdot Mirror
IBM Builds A Limited Quantum Computer
phr1 writes "IBM has announced and Yahoo has noted that the first working implementation of Shor's
factoring algorithm. Using NMR techniques they built a seven-qubit
quantum computer and factored the number 15 into the factors 3 and 5.
This is by far the most complicated quantum computation ever done.
It's quite an amazing feat--many people thought quantum computing
was just a theoretical curiosity and Shor's algorithm could never
be implemented in practice."
Does this mean that I can view the women of Maxim Magazine On-Line on the moleculer level?
I saw it, didn't particularly like it. That might have something to do with the fact that I'm a grown man and not a child.
The goatse guy for president. Win one for the gaper!
Open Source vs. Closed Source
While looking at various comments and news on Slashdot, I have noticed a lot of opinionated commentary over the relative merits of open source and closed source software. It is my hope that, in this essay, I can address all the points raised by both sides of the debate, and thus come to a rational conclusion.
First of all, a little background for those people reading this who are not computer literate enough to know much about open and closed source software. All software is compiled from source code. Open source software makes this source code public, so that others can improve upon or otherwise modify it to fit their own needs. Closed source software keeps this source code a secret, with only the development team having copies. The most significant and most often referenced pieces of open and closed source software are operating systems. Linux is the most popular open source operating system, while Windows is the most popular closed source operating system.
The major argument for open source software is that support and patching for a released product is easier and less expensive if causes of bugs can be found and fixed by users. If, for instance, a security hole were found in an open source program, whoever found it could tell people about it through the internet, and someone who knew how could find the source of the security hole and fix it, then release a patch over the internet, perhaps within hours. If, on the other hand, a security hole were found in a closed source program, the company that made it would likely be informed. The company would then have its programmers try to find the cause of it, but it could take several weeks, and it would also take up the time of programmers who could be making a new program for the company.
There are three important arguments for closed source software. The first is that it prevents hackers from using the source code to program virii and other hacking tools. With an open source, anyone can find out the weaknesses in software, even Afghani hackers or other terrorists. Another argument is that having an open source is disastrous for businesses which hope to be competetive. It is obvious that it is impossible to make money by giving away a product, but even if a company is not primarily concerned with making software, open source software is a very bad idea. This is because, first of all, open source software is easily hacked. Hackers have access to the source, so they can steal a company's valuable data. Also, a legal agreement called the GPL means that the company might have to make the product of its employees' hard work public, so that its competitor could simply take it. Finally, since open source software simply cannot be expected to make money, open source software is unlikely to be supported by a large company. This means that a company with open source software installed will be virtually unable to get technical support, while one with closed source software will likely be easily able to get superior tech support.
I think it is pretty clear that closed source software is inherently superior to open source software. I'm sure that this comment will be modded down as a 'troll', despite the fact that all my arguments are rational, factual, and unbiased. The fact remains, however, that open source software will simply not be feasible until some solution is found to its vulnerability to hackers, its lack of support and its complete lack of profitability.
Imagine having to install your Microsoft Quantum XP security patches with an NMR machine. Rob.
Some large corporations WILL discharge contractors after some fixed time, to avoid entanglement with issues of "common law employees". One I've seen is that after 1 year of working, a contractor MUST be taken off contract or switched to full time. Be sure there isn't some rule like this afoot before you make your choice.
the kind that tastes not entirely unlike tea, of course.
I just created a quantum shit in my toilet.
Of course, it was just a regualr shit until I turned around and observed it. Now it can factor 2048 bit numbers and resist the application of Glade Fresh Scent mist too.
1 and 7?
Actually, thats not funny.
YOU'RE A FUCKING FAGGOT!
sig: I am a pathetic loser troll that beats a man in the head but then turns around and sues HIM for my bruised hand
Someone who has their head up their asshole.
how do you factor a prime ????
n*1
eventually
An Introduction to to Quantum Computing for Non-Physicists [lanl.gov] - Available in PDF, PostScript, and others.
Thank you for the great article, merely by reading the title it's definitely for me.
However, there's still far too many mathematics symbols in there which I don't understand. Do you have other articles for non-Physicists and non-Mathematics?
Come on guys... you must Mod this up!!!!
Gravity!... It's not just a good idea... It's the Law!
I can just imagine the beowulf cluster of closed boxes, each holding a cat both alive and dead in an indeterminate state.
Somebody call PETA!
~jeff