WildPalmTree

joined 1 year ago
[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

If the state were to fund it adequately... I find little flaw with it.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

We can be dumb together.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It was just a little pun. Advocating / Avocading.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Such a nice opportunity lost. "I'm not avocading for it."

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Closer to none than some, I would assume.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Monkey wrangler. I wrangle monkeys.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Personally, I bet as i hope things won't go because if it goes bad, at least I get some cash. Hedge. I can't be alone in this.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But I am! Quantum computing is not conventional computing. See!

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Oh, but I am. That's why I said what I said. Even if they have one, it will be severely lacking; indicated by where public research is at.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Which one? A super computer? Its just faster than a conventional computer by a factor that doesn't matter. A quantum computer? The public field would be way closer to that if "the government" had one that would be useful.

[–] WildPalmTree@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

But this is not like the past. Quantum computers is not an step in evolution, it is a jump, as if from no computers to computers. Of course it's possible, but there is no basis or indication for it and so no reason to assume it. Why believe the less likely thing instead of the more likely?

view more: next ›