>
Tucker shares 'backroom' info about brawl between him and Israel First crowd…
Why Isn't There a Cure for Alzheimer's Disease?
US Government Revokes 80,000 Visas
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman served legal papers during speech in dramatic on-stage ambush
Goodbye, Cavities? Scientists Just Found a Way to Regrow Tooth Enamel
Scientists Say They've Figured Out How to Transcribe Your Thoughts From an MRI Scan
SanDisk stuffed 1 TB of storage into the smallest Type-C thumb drive ever
Calling Dr. Grok. Can AI Do Better than Your Primary Physician?
HUGE 32kWh LiFePO4 DIY Battery w/ 628Ah Cells! 90 Minute Build
What Has Bitcoin Become 17 Years After Satoshi Nakamoto Published The Whitepaper?
Japan just injected artificial blood into a human. No blood type needed. No refrigeration.
The 6 Best LLM Tools To Run Models Locally
Testing My First Sodium-Ion Solar Battery
A man once paralyzed from the waist down now stands on his own, not with machines or wires,...

NISQ devices cannot be simulated by brute force using the most powerful currently existing supercomputers.
NISQ will be an interesting tool for exploring physics. It might also have useful applications. But we're not sure about that.
NISQ will not change the world by itself. Rather it is a step toward more powerful quantum technologies of the future.
Potentially transformative scalable quantum computers may still be decades away. We're not sure how long it will take.
Qubit "quality"
The number of qubits is an important metric, but it is not the only thing that matters. The quality of the qubits, and of the "quantum gates" that process the qubits, is also very important. All quantum gates today are noisy, but some are better than
others. Qubit measurements are also noisy.
For today's best hardware (superconducting circuits or trapped ions), the probability of error per (two-qubit) gate is about 1 per 1000, and the probability of error per measurement is about 1 per 100 (or better for trapped ions). We don't yet know whether systems with many qubits will perform that well.