The Standup with ThePrimeagen - What even is Quantum Computing?!

Episode Date: November 1, 2025

https://twitch.tv/ThePrimeagen - I Stream on Twitch https://twitter.com/terminaldotshop - Want to order coffee over SSH? ssh terminal.shop Become Backend Dev: https://boot.dev/prime (plus i make courses for them) This is also the best way to support me is to support yourself becoming a better backend engineer. Great News? Want me to research and create video????: https://www.reddit.com/r/ThePrimeagen Kinesis Advantage 360: https://bit.ly/Prime-Kinesis

Trash. I'm watching. Nope, I have something more important. Oh. Did you try it? You were so right, dude. Bang, her, bro. Absolutely.

My favorites are the red and the pink. Red. Obviously, you should listen to trash when it comes to snacks. Like, the first time I ate it, like, I ate a red one. My eyes, like, rolled through the back of my head. I was like, I can't believe. I'm sorry. What were the name of those treats?

I thought was a dog treat. Dog treats. I was thinking they were dog trees. Yeah, it says Chewy on it. They kind of come in a bag. That's a dog brand, isn't it? It is. This is Chewis.

Chewis. Yeah, but Chewy.com is a dog food. Yeah, yeah. It's like a subscription thing. Yeah. Does say allergy friendly, the more I read the packaging, I'm wondering. Trash did I, have I been eating dog treats for the past day? They're delicious!

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, sorry. Alright, welcome to the stand-up. All right, welcome to the stand-up today we have with us, Ginger Bill, Bill, an actual quantum physicist, Teage and Trash Dev. And we're going to be talking about things quantum AI. Because, you know, I don't know about you guys, but every single week I see some breakthrough quantum computers going to be absolutely amazing. And this week, Google released a paper showing that it's able to do verifiable quantum

algorithms, getting reproducible results through. And it's finally time AI supremacy or quantum supremacy. Maybe quantum AI supremacy is going to happen. It's from Google Quantum AI. It's going to happen. We're going to see it in sense. None of us are smart enough except for Ginger Bill to actually understand what's happening. We thought we would discuss this and bring on a real semi-expert.

Clause eye expert. I know we're talking about semi-trucks? To lay the foundation this week, Google released a paper along with the marketing video, showing that they've created something called Quantum Echoes, effectively a way for them to be able to take some sort of chip with 105 qubits on it, do some sort of perturbation is what they call it, make it vibrate, and run the algorithm in reverse, and boom, they're sucking out answers with a pretty high reproducibility and able to actually predict structures of molecules and all that.

Now, for us, what does that actually mean? Is there any actual practical implication? Is 21 still the largest factored number by quantum machinery? We will find out. All right, Ginger Pill, since all of us are actual online idiots, can you just please give us like the... Professional online idiots. Professional. Yes, sir.

Sorry, I'm paid. I'm paid. So I'm not an amateur. A professional. I'm a professional here. I made a couple dollars. That's good. We made a couple dollars.

Deleted it to a couple posts, not a big deal. Oh no. Could you please give us like the high level of quantum computers, what this actually means, like something to kind of help us as idiots understand all these sensational articles we see constantly? Right. I'm going to try my best here to explain

any of this. Okay, so most people, if you've ever, I'm assuming the audience here knows at least the basics of computers, right? They probably know quantum slip test as well, the double whatever. Yeah, yeah. So I'm going to ignore all that. I'm going to go even more simpler first, just to break it down. You've got classical computers, right?

It's called it classical, right? This is where you've got, let's say, binary computers. Yeah, right? Yeah, all those stuff like him to Bach myself. But yes. do like a sonata and see mine now we're going from there classical communities

we've got binary things you've got like ones and zeros over there where we call these bits right a bit it can store two states either zero or one if you got two bits you can store four states zero one one one zero right I don't know why I didn't that order

but that's you can see what it gets and you get to three bits you get eight and you can see how many different states you get now the thing is in classical computers when you've got something with that many bits it's either in one of the one of the states only, right? If there are three bits, it can be only one of the eight.

That's it. Did you find the errors? I don't even know what they look. What do they even look like? They're in the phone. In the phone? Yeah, they're definitely in there. I just don't know how we labeled them.

I got it, don't worry. You've got to figure it out. We're running out of time prime. You've got to find them and meet me at the stand-up. Roger. Get all the context you need to debug your problem, because code breaks. So fix it faster with Century.

Right, that's the simple bit about and then basic classical computers. You've got bits. Now, when you get to quantum mechanics, they have something fancier. They like calling them Q bits or quantum bits. And what they do here is I'm going to say a fancy word, which isn't actually that fancy at all when you actually understand it, is they say Q bit is something that is a superposition of both the zero value and the one value. Now, the word superposition really confuses most people.

because it's just sounds silly. But most people probably understand what it is. The one you always like the textbook, one you learn in physics is like waves, right? If you can think of imagining extremely still pond, right? And you dropped like two stones at different parts of the pond. They'll produce ripples, right? When the ripples come to interact with each other, right?

You've got two sets of waves coming to interact. How those waves interact with each other add together to make one new wave that's called a superposition of two different waves. That's it. That's what it means. Literally, they've come together, and that's a superposition. Now, the more abstract thing is when you're talking about these qubit things, is that they are now superpositions of the zero and a one state

or whatever they correlate to. So in this case, it's a little bit more like, hey, this thing, this qubit, it's like we say there's a 40% chance it's in the 0% state, and a 60% chance it's in the one state, right? But that's its state currently. That's the state of that qubit. I'm going to make it completely static here as well, not to confuse anyone further.

So you've got a basic, basic idea of what a qubit is. Now, the funny bit is when you have two cubits, right? Let's make it a little bit more fancy. Again, before we had two bits, we have there's four possible states. But when you have two cubits, you usually want to entangle them together. Now, this word entanglement is, like, in the event.

links, you can't pull them apart. Yeah. Okay, hold on. I need to know, is T.J. correct? Is it entanglement like the Avengers? I actually haven't watched any of the movie. Neither the spy one or the superheroes. What about like love is blind entanglements?

Like, what kind of entanglements are we talking about here? Is Interstellar a documentary? I'm sorry to tell you, Teage. It's a film by Christopher Nolan. That's my, he makes my favorite documentaries. I know. Sometimes I like Tenant. That's a really good documentary, right? Sorry,

Gingerville, you can continue. You can't just drop the entanglement word without us sounding like an idiot. Again, you got a professional idiot. No, no, but the word tanglement, it just means that these two, like, two states are intrinsic linked and you can't, they're not separable.

It's a better way of putting it, right? No, it's not. I don't know what it actually means, but okay, there's just two things together. Yeah, yeah, like they, like, it's, this is the weird bit about quantum mechanics, is the entanglement bit, right? Right? Super position bit is not actually the weird bit.

Yeah. That even happens in classical, if you want to be like classical waves, right? They can be superpositioning. If we drop the two things in the lake, it makes sense. The entangle bit is literally they just are like joined together. You cannot separate them. There's no math model operation that can separate those two states. They're just now intrinsically linked.

What scientists have joined let no man separate is what you're trying to say. Is that the rule? Yes. Okay. Bang. There's a caveat there. I'm trying to dumb this down as much as I can. But it doesn't matter.

Right. There's a reason. Right. So we've got this entanglement, right? You can entangle anything like really together. But in any sense, they have these cubits, whatever these cubits are represented by, right? And then when they get entangled, say you got two of them entangled. Now of this state, before we've had two bits, you'd have like the 0-0-0-0-0-1 and 1-1 state, right?

Now to get together with those qubits, you're actually representing all four of those states at once with certain probabilities. So there's like, we'll say 20% chance it's in state A, 10% chance is state B, 30% chance it's in state C, and 40% chance it's in state D. I had to add that up in my head. Like, they're kind of the probabilities it could be in that particular state, right? So now you've got all of them all stored at once. Now when you add more and more qubits and things, you get more and more of these different states that are all being represented at once. So I think like the latest computer, like come on computers, like, is it over 600 cubits or something. It's probably more than that now.

I don't know. It's a big number in the computer. Because it's two to whatever that number is, is how many states there are. That's like more. Yes, it's two to that. Why would you need a, so just help me understand even like a stupid question. Why would I need something bigger than like 64 cubits or maybe 128 qubits, considering it literally represents the probability of all values at any given moment? only bits they've got. Like in your computer right now, you've probably got like 64 gigabytes of

RAM, right? That's a lot of bits. That's a lot of bits. That's all they have memory-wise. That's all the bits. Yeah, but, but, but the, okay. Yeah. But we only, so yes, they can store a lot of states and in fact, they not just store two to the end. They do two to the two to the end. So it's really big. So 300 cubits is effectively equivalent to be what, more than atoms in the universe. Yeah. Right. But like CPU's process like a set like one operation at a time or is this, where these things are like, I don't know, seance.

Well, they're still doing one operation at a time. But the thing is because of their probability distribution thing going on here, right? It's kind of like it's doing it all probabilistically distributed across all the possible states. So it can do multiple, quote unquote, multiple things at once. Now for most problems, this is where like most people may not understand. Quantum computing has got some only certain cases where it's useful. Most of the time, classical, as we know at the moment, is better for virtually everything else. Certain things are better with the quantum algorithms.

So the most common one that most probably have heard of is Shaw's algorithm. This is the one where you can decompose an integer into its prime components, right? What do I have to do with that? And this can be done in polynomial time. Sorry. Prime components, Ginger Bill. Keep up. The prime components.

The prime again. Yeah. All right. Sorry. Sorry. I'm trying to think as well. There's really hard to do when you're trying to actually think. You're dealing with some professionals right now, okay?

I'm not listening. I'm just trying to come up with jokes. I had a joke about web browsers and we went right past it. All right. TJ, let your web... Can I say it now? Since we're paused, I was going to say,

Ginger Bill said classical computers are better at web browsers, so I was wondering if that's kind of like Ginger Bill currently co-signing on the state of the web. Let's see, I'm putting the rubber stamp on it.

Great, yeah, there we go. Looks good to me. Looks good, looks fine to me. Yeah, I just, yeah, you got PR. Yeah, I'll just merge it. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if it'll pass the tests. We'll fix it later.

Never do. No, but yeah, so that's kind of the thing. So then there's, the last component when it comes to quantum computing, if I can think of, which is effectively interference and decoherence, which I'm going to merge together just to keep it simple, which is not correct, but whatever. Interference, you have to understand is that these quantum systems, if you've ever seen a quantum computer, they have to be really, really cold, like they're literally like fractions of a degree above absolute zero most of the time.

And the reason why you want to get them cold is you don't want any background noise interfering with it. Because if you have background. noise, it will make it noisy. And again, when these systems, again, they're not discrete like your computer. They're probabilistic, effectively. And if you add more noise to it, your result gets more noisy and noisier until you've got absolute noise at the end of the age. It's useless. So sometimes you'll have interference from these different probabilities, like sometimes the probabilities will amplify each other or cancel each other out as well. If there's even no background noise, that's another form of interference, which can be useful

for certain algorithms. Like, again, if you have two waves on an ocean or a thing, if they're in sync, they'll get amplitude. If they're out of phase, they'll cancel each other out. And then the last one is decoherence, which is... Trash talking. Yeah. Decoherence is the other one where you would...

I say it's collapsing a quantum state into a classical state, right? Which is where you want to read it. You want to be able to read something in a classical state. Is it in this state or another? Can you explain it? in terms of monads because this feels a little confusing. Is this like the... Yeah, it's dumb it down to monads.

Oh, God, whatever. The joke is the endow functors. I can't remember the flipping joke. Look, prime. They could be anywhere in the burrito until you open it up and look inside, and then they're only in one spot in the burrito. And how many times you close the burrito and look inside again? They're in the same spot.

Got it. I understand it. Right? Yeah. Kind of. I... It feels like, yeah, whatever, man. Well, yeah, monads aren't really burrito. either, Ginger Bill, okay?

They're a computer construct. All right, they're not actually a burrito. I know there's not burritos in my machine, Ginger Bill. There's not really burritos in there, who's the professional idiot now, Ginger Bill? Is this why you like procedural programming? Other than on a GPU, when it's red hot. Come on.

You could maybe cook one on there. Okay, I'll give you that one. I'll give you that. And it's a good place to keep them warm. It's a nice little warm room. There we go. I don't see the problem. Mm-hmm.

Alright, all right, all right, all right. I have a quick question. I'm probably going to sidetrack this. That's great. We were not sidetracked right now, so I'm very upset that you're doing this. From everything you've explained, it just sounds like it's so fragile. Yes. So do we, are they like burying these things like undergrounds or just like no noise?

No, so when you do, so to be very careful here, people who don't know, I was, my specialty was not quantum computing. What I used to do it, it was quantum opting. which is still heavily related to this, by the way. So luckily, I can black it enough. So I'm okay. So what they do is they don't necessarily put it underground. So when you make things very cold in that sense, what you're doing is, depending on which system you're in,

if you'll say you're trapping, let's say you're trapping an atom, let's just say you're trapping an atom. What you're doing is temperature at the end of the day is you're reducing the jigglyness of something, right? Temperature is jigglyness. Technical term. No jiggle. No jiggle.

So the way to imagine when you've, cooling down an atom, right? Imagine it's an elephant and you're shooting ping pong balls at it. Right? If you shoot ping pong balls from every single direction, eventually you'll slow down that elephant. Yeah? Mm-hmm.

Now, in this analogy, the atom is the elephant and the ping-pong balls are light. Literally photons, particles of light. Yeah? So the way you do this to get it to work, um, how do I explain it? I'm going to, oh, this is going to be fun explaining. cooling down atoms. This will be fun, right? I hope. I'm having a lot of fun walking, you use ice.

Right, right. You, look, right. That's what is, what temperature is. It's jigglers. And what you're doing is you're trying to get rid of the jigglyness. Because when things are cold, they slow down. Yeah, that's what temperature is. It literally is less, if you've got more jignolence, it's a hot tub. It's less jiggily, it's colder. You can't ever go still. That would be absolute zero. You can't hit that. why not yeah why not

that comes into quantum mechanics and that's all to do with Heisenberg uncertainty okay well you just checkmated me the time from Breaking Bad where does that come into this ginger bill

yes say my name no no so actually to explain that this is like oh great explaining quantum mechanics to people it's fun so many new words

So what that means by the quantum, Heismuron Center principle is that there's, when you measure something, there's like a fundamental, something called action to the universe, and you can't go below it. So when you're measuring like the position of something, right? If you get below this limit, the product that you measure to get this action is the momentum, right?

Then the uncertainty that you're measuring the position in, the uncertainty of the momentum would have to skyrocket. So actually, that means it's now jiggling even more. or if you got that down you don't know where the heck this atom is anymore right we can't observe it we can't send light or anything else at it's going to hit it you are observing it just you you think like the uncertainty

gets spread so far you can actually observe observe this uncertainty principle in like the like macro world it's not like a small level thing you can actually see it in the big world about I haven't got demonstrated already to do this just just find something on YouTube we probably exist already to find a little thing

but that's why you can't get down to real absolute zero because effectively you're reaching those certain limits. So when you get this cold with this, I'll never explain to anybody. Quick question, because I'm sure people watching this are going to want to know. Can this thing explode and just like blow everybody up?

A quantum computer? Which big? I don't know because if I had a quantum computer in my attic and then like things got hot, would it blow me up? Great question. It depends on the cyber quantum computer, right? Because it depends on, if I remember correctly, There's different ways of making quantum computers.

You can do like atoms, iron traps, there's photon-based ones, there's all this, right? Depends on what they represent, right? Of course. I should clearly know this, right? You're in the know. Oh, I don't know what I... Which brand of photon one do you like? I knew that there's different types.

Stupid me. The show answers, yes, they could blow because you've got lasers to deal with. And these are not like... Like, the big lasers. Also, this is clearly not a wide wear in a laser lab, because a tie would be literally a health hazard. Because you going over a bed to the table and do that and like, ah, damn it. I've now burnt my tie and killed myself.

That's how they find stuff out, though. Like, that's pretty much how microwaves got invented. Yeah. I heard, yeah, the microwave. Someone is likely noticed he's a chocolate bar melted in his back pocket, didn't they? Luckily, he didn't microwave his ass. But, yeah, just the chocolate. It's true.

That's real history. Yeah. You can, let's get back on track. What's the radiation that develops in a lot of people's basements that they have to get tests on? Microplastics. No, it's radon. Radion? Radion. Radion gas. Radon's

literally an element, right? Yeah, some dude walked through some sort of checkpoint, and he was just like so nuclear that it was setting up all sorts of alarms. What?

No. It turns out he should have like, he was probably going to die pretty soon, but it just turns out they discovered that there's this thing that happens in people's basements.

Like, real story. It's not just basements because it usually happens where near coal mines. If you've got a lot of coal deposits, you have to have to, to worry about radon gas. Like I live near my, my dad

my uncle and my grandparents are all coal miners, right? So they always had to be careful of that as well. Did they have the black lung? No, none of them are fine. They're all fine for that. Okay, that's good. Yeah, yeah. All right, sorry. Okay, let's let's get on the whole point. This is the stand-up. We never go on topic.

This is good. This is good. I'm actually loving this because I'm actually learning something also. So I've got a separate question. There's a minor thing I've missed out. It's also you have to do in a massive magnetic field, by the way, as well. You don't just shoot lasers at it in all directions. You have a magnetic field as well, which the way I'm trying to figure out it.

It gets into... Does magnetism just like help hold it because magnetism so strong? No. No. So what you're doing... No, no, this is a trick. What you're doing with the magnetism and a really strong magnetism field is when you... How do I put this?

Only certain wavelengths, like certain frequencies or wavelengths or color. of photons can get absorbed by atoms, right, by the electrons in the atoms. They have to be exact like certain frequencies. If you add an electric field, I'm trying to done this down, it can make those ranges a little bit fuzzier and easier to hit. It's about high-to-fine levels and all this, right? Yeah, yeah. Same assist, effectively.

It's effectively aim-assist. Because without it, you'd be screwed. Mm-hmm. Right? Yeah, like me playing Call of Duty. I got it. I'm following. That's why if you went the control, you got the aim-assist, it's fine.

to peer erase clearly uses a mouse. So, right. Fine like that. But that's kind of what you're doing with the magnetic fields. But if I remember also correctly, some of the early cubic ones were also like MRI, like effectively MRI machines,

effectively is how they worked, which is similar, the same thing, you have to have the massive magnets, but instead of like, they do, there would have been like photons, but not necessarily lasers,

they would have done like radio waves, which is how an MRI machine works. effectively, you've got giant magnetic field, you shoot radio waves at it, and then the hydrogen atoms in the water will effectively re-emit those photons as bits of light again so you can see it.

I haven't heard any of these words since I was in college. Yeah. Trash, you were supposed to be doing research for this episode. Research. This is research. I was watching videos for like five-year-olds. It was literally like, this was like for a 10-year-olds, like,

this is beyond that. Josh. Right. But that's it. That's my crash course in quantum computing for you done, guys. Okay. So I've got a question about them. So I get it.

The thing that's very different about it is instead of ones and zeros, we have probability distributions. I feel like that's kind of like a big part of it. And then we can sample from those probability distributions like a lot of times. But it's better if we can make the probability distributions, be more probable to give the answers that we want. Right? So that's where we have to write completely new algorithms.

My understanding is, I have a SHA-256 algorithm. I write it for regular real computers that actually work and can go in consumers' places and aren't like a government conspiracy like birds. I can do those. I write it at my house. I write it down. If I wanted to solve SHA-256, for quantum computers, we have to write a completely new style of algorithm that is all based around quantum gates and stuff like this.

They have higher level programming languages. Maybe we should go there and then I have question about that thing. No, no, I don't think so, yeah. I think those different gates for people are listening, maybe logic gates. You've got like and or not those kind of things, right? They're logic gates in normal. That's how all of computers are built. Guys, how they're all built on this podcast, okay?

We're not going to do any gatekeeping around here. Right, no gatekeeping. We're only or gates. Or gates only. I like Zores. Zores are nice. Yeah. That was nice.

But on quantum of using, you have more gates. You have these different things entirely. Yes. And they don't even have the same logic. So one of them is, this is like effectively it happens in like matrices, but they call it a Addemard or Hadamard, if I'm not going to do the French pronunciation. So the Hadamard. Thank you.

Once, right? Because screw French pronunciations. I'll even get them wrong anyway. So that's not the correct pronunciation in my accent. And I'm like, oh, God. We don't even like you. You don't, you're not. we weren't born in France, so it's fine.

I'm like, what can I do? I'm English, right? They hate me anyway, so it's fine. Just by, yeah. So we got a Hadamard thing. So Hadamard is, normal Hadamard product in matrices is you just multiply each element by itself, and that's it. It's like a dot product effectively, but for matrices.

But the Hadamar product for quantum mechanics, not going to be quantum computing, is effectively you're changing, you're using this to change the basis vectors, the basis of the thing you're dealing with. So if actually Basis vectors are like X, Y, and Z. They point in a direction. Thank you for calling it up. My brain's both. Instead of like having it this way,

you're changing your bases to look like this or something. You're just rotating it around somewhere, effectively. And that's what the Hadamar product does, right? And then you can use that to make probability distributions look different, right? That's my understanding. Yes, you can do, again, it's a simple

other things to add together. And most of the, different gates are just different types of matrices at the end of the day and they do different things so that had a Mard again I'm doing it wrong or wrong it's effectively just as a slight rotation kind of thing there's currently three whiteboards on Tj's camera right now. Tresh can you see this trash can you see this yep okay this is like X and Y right but really you don't want to do that you want to say that this one is like one or something like this at this one that'll do that'll do Oh, right?

Get those cats out there, man. I got some, I got my cats. I did my research. I'm coming in hot right now. By the way, they are literally called bras and cats because Dirac was an autistic guy. I thought it was funny. No! Braves and cow!

That's actually going to stay. That's 100% going to stay in. It's ruined now. Sorry. Oh, well. I'm actually, I'm going to have to call Michelle and get a new one. Okay. So you start and you've got this guy.

This represents a state vector for a, for a qubit, maybe. Yes. This is good. This is good. Okay, got it. I'm trying to see where his knowledge ends because he's doing good so far. Chat. Okay, chat. Chat, if you're out here, comment, Pog, Tige whiteboarding, Pog, thank you.

Okay. So then we can do a Hadamar thing. We can reflect it across an axis. Then it looks like this. I think I can't remember exactly the matrix, but it does affect me. It can do something like that. Does something like that. Yeah, whatever.

But far less confidence in that next line you're, okay. You're so right. You're like, uh. You're so right. Thank you. You're absolutely correct. No. Oh, it's worse.

You're thinking about it too much now. I think he's just out of team right now. But then what we can do, this one's not necessarily that helpful for finding out a better answer. We can also rotate them. I don't remember how we do that, but there's rotating gates that you can put stuff through. So imagine trash. You can get this arrow closer to this one.

Eventually you could make it point. And it only kept two. So then the chances of getting the right answer are higher and higher and higher. And then we've solved the problem and I can hack your password. I don't know if that's right. How close am I, Ginger Bill? I mean, not the password hacking bit, but like, you did, literally, it's just linear algebra, man. It's just linear algebra.

It's just linear algebra. Yeah, but so are AI just linear algebra. Okay. Yeah, everything's linear algebra at the end of the day, man. Okay. Everything is a linear algebra or wiggles. So this is how you guys are describing it, and it just makes it really confusing.

Or at least this is how all quantum computers. Here's my whiteboard. Okay, now it's my time. That's a blackboard. Everyone describes everything quantum, and I'm very confused by it, is that you first start off with a state, and you somehow feed it a problem.

Right? You feed the quantum, all the little gates, these little problems. And somehow it's able to take that problem, and then when you look at it, the probabilities are just aligned in the giant cloud space, that is two to the N or whatever it is,

possibilities in here. It's just the correct N. It's the correct two to the end or two to the two to the end space. And it's just like, here's your answer. It's these 105 bits. And you're just like, how does it go to the correct answer? I don't understand that leap where it goes from probabilistically all the answers, but there's one once you observe it and it's the correct one.

Let me try. Let me try, Ginger Bill, and then you can tell me where I'm wrong. Go ahead, go ahead. Okay. All right. So it all starts with the flux capacity. I'm kidding. I'm kidding.

I'm kidding. Let me try and answer it for real. I'm with you. I'm, okay. So the box that they put it in, for me, this is the thing that I think I'm getting, but I don't know for sure. It has a custom algorithm

to solve the question that you are trying to ask, right? They have to build just like an FPGA, field, programmable, gate array. That's literally, we build a custom computer to solve the problem that you want to put in. I built an FPGA

that could play the game of life where you would press buttons and it would move you on stuff and then you would press another button you would go, or no, not game of life, shoots and ladders, sorry, I got confused

because I know Prime loves game of life. I do. They could play shoots and ladders and it would be like you landed on 13, boom, you jumped all the way to 27. Boom, right? And it was just,

it was, but it was just an FPGA. It could only do that one thing. We will build quantum computers for now because we don't have a programming language for quantum computer that can solve particular problems. Maybe this willow chip from Google can be reprogrammed to do other things or it has lots of gates or something that can let it do that. But like, so you have to build a custom quantum algorithm that can do basically a matrix transformation that takes some input and puts it into the output that you want. The thing that's different about it is it can do not like a lot of them at once,

But it can do, I don't know, I don't know how to describe it. So I don't know. There's my closest thing. It's not that it's all at once. This is, it's just that that is the kind of mathematics you can do. Yes. Thank you. Right.

It's just different is the better way of describing it. Yeah, it's hard to explain because it's like, it's like, it's like, okay. I'm more confusing ever right now. No, but the black box is not a, like, I feel like when people say quantum computing, they're like, as soon as we get the quantum computer, passwords are dead. dead. And you're like, we don't have a SHA-256 reverser quantum computer algorithm yet, right? So we would have to still find a way to express that transformation in quantum computing gates or some higher-level construct that could do that, that then could do the math to solve that question for you. And

generally speaking, my understanding, maybe I'm wrong. And this one, Gingerbill, it's not that it solves it instantly, but that then it's not like it's 0 of one time when we figure it out. Now it's that there's some, instead of being like shot 256 and it's going to take a trillion years to solve it. It's like now you could do it in like a day. To use the canonical example of a quantum algorithm with the Schor's algorithm, right, which is the one where you find the prime factors of an integer. On a quantum computer, you can factor like an integer N, right?

and Shores Algorithms can do this in polynomial time. In fact, I think it's proportional to the log of n, the time it takes. Whilst on a non-quotan computer, effectively, I think it's like much, much slower than log-N. I don't think it's exponential, but it's like maybe n factorial or it could be some like that, which is effectively exponential. I thought that factorial was bigger than exponential. It is, but it's close enough on the same order. Okay.

I'm being lazy with my terms here. But in general, that means it's very, very slow. But the quantum one, they can do it again, log-in, which means it means it's actually a lot, lot faster for this particular algorithm, is how it does it. And there is a way of doing it, but it has to be through the quantum algorithm.

And the way you're doing it is you effectively doing through this estimation thing. And a lot of them are, when you were saying asking the algorithm stuff, I'm trying to remember the show's algorithm off the top of my head, which is hard. And I'm also looking here, just even then,

it's still not helpful with, Wikipedia notes because Wikipedia is written for PhDs. Yeah, but effectively a lot of it is just... You can read it. Yeah, this is a lab coat. This is actually my old lab coat, but made into a Halloween costume. So yeah, this is clearly this is Halloween. There you go.

Your career is now a joke. Yeah, it's a joke. But it's not my career anymore, unfortunately. I don't know. I've had a lot of thought in it. Okay. But yeah, it's kind of one of those things where you just do a lot of the math and you can break it down into these quantum logic gates and such this way. But it's just to figure out what that algorithm is.

So the question is, how does it do this in the log end time? Well, it's kind of, it is kind of doing more of these estimations at once, which is why those probabilities work. And the ones that don't work effectively, they get filtered out. Another way of thinking about this through is if I can, uh, oh, you know when you do audio and you've got an EQ, right? Yep. We do the bandpass filters, aren't you? Yeah, good point.

You're effectively doing that. That's how you filter out the stuff you want. So if certain things come in and they're like the well off the spectrum, they get filtered out, it's like, oh, they're not probably the right answer, nowhere near. They'll be much lower down. Where the ones that might be closer to the right answer, they'll get more amplified up. Right? This is like a Fourier transform thingy, a quantum Fourier transform specifically.

but like it's that kind of thingy my bob it's really hard to explain because i'm not going into real complicated mathematics i don't want to do that thank you for not doing that thank you for not thank you i would have liked that we'll do that on a separate episode watching this video in the comments i'm like i'm trying guys i'm trying the thing is no matter what you say though about quantum mechanics quantum computers somebody in the comment is going to say well they've already solved it they've been lying to us all along so somebody's going to be mad in the comments no matter what yeah true You can't keep them all happy. Imagine how well you explain things.

We need to go dumber right now. I don't know, but I actually don't know if we can. Follow up question. Follow a question for this, Gingerbill. For Shores, it's not that we put in a number at the front into our mystical quantum computer box. And then in one shot, we're guaranteed to get out the prime factors. Right? That's right.

Yeah. Okay. So then it runs multiple times with a new state vector, just like if we wrote a really dumb classical computer example of, like, I'm going to find the prime factors by just like literally like guessing random numbers. Or I'm going to go start at zero. And I'm going to go to, well, obviously not zero. I'm going to start at one.

I'm going to go all the way to here and see which one's factor. I'm going to start. And then we like just keep guessing until we find them because it's a search problem. Yeah. Right. And so there's just better search or there's a better way to branch prune is what you're saying is that you can. Yes. Because when you think it's about statistical, right?

Because again, with the quantum systems, there's a lot of noise due to the stuff. Earlier, classical computers had a lot of noise to them as well, by the way. It's just that nowadays we've gotten so good at this. In fact, well, you're not really. But we've gotten better at it nowadays that you don't get the noise. Sometimes you hit it, like, especially like the newer RAM stuff where they're so crammed together, like the transistors are, where they start to get, like, you get error happening with, like, the RAM. Like, even in classical, because quantum effects start happening, right?

They effectively, things get noisy. The electrons jump between everything and, I say, electrons, you know, I mean, everything gets fuzzy. So you get, that's why you need, like, error correcting memory a lot at the time sometimes to get rid of that. But when in quantum, it's, like, it's fundamentally, yeah, everything's just noisy. And you're trying, and if you do multiple times, those multiple runs will then clean things up. So think of it as effectively as like a path tracing or something like that. And then as we do more iterations, our state vectors probability ends up looking more like... Instead of being like, you know, we have a 0.3, 0.4, 0.2, that's 0.1.

We like end at something like, oh, we're pretty sure it's this one is 9 or I guess it would be like, 5-5, 0.0, 0.0, and then like 0.45. Like if we had two slots that we needed to go to, be like, oh, well, that's... Actually, these don't go to zero, though. They'd be like 1 or something like that. Yeah, very small, very small, yeah. Because we can make them zero. That would be not right. But we can make them really small.

And then we're like, oh, when we get out... Is that absolute zero? Absolute zero. Can't do it. Absolutely not. Actually, because the... I want to go to a little tangent. Right? Yeah.

I mean a little bit... It's your turn. tangent. Yep. Uncertainty is actually intrinsic to the world. It's not like the quantum thing. It literally is what is the level of your measuring tool? If you've got a ruler or a tape measure or something.

Yeah, yeah. You've always got like literally, like if your ruler goes to, I don't know, in 30, say, millimeters, the error on that is going to be like half a millimeter, right? When you can't be any more accurate than half a millimeter. Okay. Let's do 30 seconds of an inch, right? Oh, thank you. Finally.

Yeah? If you have third seconds of inch or 16th of an inch, we'll say 16th an inch on your tape measure, right? Because they usually go down to 16th inch, right? Then obviously you have a 30 second error. We've got a 30 second error, right, on any of your measurements. So fundamentally, your error is on your measuring stick. You can't get rid of this uncertainty. Your uncertainty is fundamentally there.

This is not like a quantum thing. This is just a measuring stick thing. And you could hypothetically get less and less and less to make more accurate, but you get more accurate in the thing that you're measuring. The thing that quantum mechanics brings in is actually there's something associated with it you would start losing that information as well. You can't go, you can get more accurate on one thing

but once you get very, very close to this fundamental limit, the thing gets fuzzier, right? The other thing goes, the uncertainty of the other thing. And if it's position, momentum goes. If it's time, energy goes, right? So they're the kind of the different things, your uncertainty. So that's another thing I'll be very clear. The uncertainty principle is everywhere.

it in real life. I got a good example from real life. Trash, I know you'll relate to this one. If your kids are playing in a different room, they act different than if you're in the same room with them. Under observation, the children act differently. That's the same thing with electrons. I don't know if that's actually a good example.

So if I go look at an electron, it's going to slow down. It's going to play really nice. Slow down over there. It's going to play nice with his brother and sister. So they're now probably looking at like a bunch of electrons. They're acting differently now. Yes, they're acting like they didn't do anything. They'll have that weird cancel stance.

Me! Oh, hey, hey, dad. We're just going to start walking around my house. Hey, I see you. See you over there. Okay, I've got a follow-up question about the next part of quantum computers. I don't understand Gingerbill. What are people planning on actually using them for?

besides spending a lot of research money. That's a very good question. Thank you. And the answer is I think it's just spending a lot of research money currently. Yep. But a lot of it is like, again, they want to break encryption. Again, Shores Algon is a good example of this. If they can break a lot of basic RSA encryption, you've broken it.

I know there is some encryption, which is like quantum safe already. I just... A elliptical hash? Yeah. Or elliptical curve. Sorry. Whatever they are. Lipsical curve madness.

Some of them stuff is like, no, I'm not as impossible to rape quanticreders. They just don't have an advantage anymore. So a lot of this is they just try. It's because it's like you need step-by-step process and the resolution of each step is now. Oh, that's really smart. I don't know if that's true, but I think it's something along those lines or there's like a dependency problem that becomes really difficult for it. Yeah. And I know there's certain other hour.

because again it's all probabilistic some of the algorithms also do like you know like a random walk have you ever heard of a random walk before Monte Carlo boom like Monte Carlo yeah but random walk for people who don't know imagine a drunk man in a field he will walk randomly eventually but eventually he will get out of the field after a certain amount of time give him enough time trash me put me in a field right now wait right now I'm going to sleep that's in two dimensions by the way that's in two dimensions and then when you get to three it's fine and But the thing is, there's those things called quantum walks, right? Which is slightly, it's not a random man in the field at this point. It's a very quantum tiny little thing.

Not really, but it's just like, it does quantum stuff, right? And there's a lot of algorithms that help when you do, like, quantum walk things, right? So that's another one to use with quantum things. And they can make it go much, much faster with quantum algorithms than they can do with classical. I'm just trying to think of anything else, which I can describe. Well, here, maybe to help jog your memory, I did draw this picture of trash. He is very confused right now. That might be the thumbnail.

I tried to give you anime eyes. I'm not very good at drawings. Those are terrifying. Thank you, thank you. Right into my soul. All right, all right, all right. So let's, I want to talk about the Willow thing, because obviously the example that they gave was that that they're going to help do predicting of various structures of some sort.

I think it was, it's not protein structures. It was like structures for specific organic compounds, if I remember correctly. I can't remember exactly what was their examples. But does that mean, based on everything you've just said, that the willow chip really truly is like a single serve chip, that it can only do this predictive thing? Or are they reprogrammable, like field programmable gatories? I don't know fully, but I think they're probably single-purpose chips currently.

Wow. Okay, and these chips, you have to also run at like negative 271. Yeah, yeah, yeah, like very, very cold. Celsius. And what is it, negative 486 Fahrenheit, whatever it is like that. No, we don't use those units, okay, Celsius is like here. We can use Calvin, though. Yeah, it's like one Calvin. Yeah, much less than one, actually, but yeah, yeah. Yeah, idiots.

Yeah. I was going to call that out, but I don't want to. Yeah, yeah. Very, very cold is what I'm saying, yeah? Because they want to minimize the noise. They want to minimize the noise. They have to get it very cold. They want no noise and thing like that.

Okay. So when you say they have to research, that means every single problem that potentially contains quantum supremacy, they have to first, like, hand construct. These are not FPGAs where they're more general purpose. They actually have to do like A6 for every single problem. Except in the quantum whale. Someone in the comments will tell me I'm completely wrong,

and they're probably right and being completely wrong, because, again, this is not my field. I know I've got the lab coat, but it doesn't mean it's actually my field. He's a compiler dev these days. Okay, do you know any reason why, like, generalized programming languages can't or currently don't exist for this? Like, how is there not just some...

I think they're probably... I think they're probably the equivalent of assembly at the moment. We haven't had that revolution to get to like the equivalent of like C or Pascal for computers yet. Or the algorithm or Oden, even. Because the thing is modern, like normal programmers things, they're all classical. They're based on classical logic, right? Get Anns, knots, oars, zors, that kind of thing. So they do have some stuff though.

Yeah, they probably have some stuff already, which is why they represent all the gates. But it's effectively like drawing circuit diagrams at the end of the day is what they're doing. No, they have an open source Python circuit, but it is basically like what you're saying, though. Yeah, as I said, it's effectively assembly language level. Right. Not... You construct the circuit, it looks like... Yeah, you're constructing the circuit with Python.

It's not like Python is being ran on these machines. Yes, right, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. You're using Python to construct the thing, so it's kind of like... effectively, you're just writing a compiler. Yes. And that's why. So I think the reason why they haven't found this yet, because also it's like they don't need it. Like, think back in the day when it was von Neumann.

Not a joke. Von Neumann believed assembly language was not programming. He said only a real, like, person should literally write the machine code. Like, he believed, like, oh, yeah, you should, if you're not doing real programming unless you're doing machine code. I do love that Von Neumann was, uh, was like effectively just like a Twitter rage baiter back in the day. Just like, yeah, that's not real programmers. I would have two.

Dude, I would love seeing him on X. Say students, but like one of his postgrad saying, you know, you shouldn't be made. Why are you make an assembler? Just write the machine code. Come on. I also did, by the way, just look up Willow, according to some searching. Less than 20 millicelvens is where it needs to run at. Pretty cold. That's very cold. So is there a future where people can actually run quantum computers, or is this forever in Sergei Bryn's basement? Like, you just can't, you have to be the ultra, ultra wealthy company

to be able to have any access to this in the next 50 years. So the answer is Most likely most people's basements for the next few decades Unless if they get like Let's say, photonic based ones better Because usually they can work at multiple temperatures or whatever Or if they found out a room temperature semiconductor That oh well X was really hopping with that

When was that last year? Not sendic conductor, superconductor, right? Sorry, superconductor, sorry, yeah, superconductor Sorry, it got to be the S is close enough Conductors are going hard right now at room temperature. I don't know what we're talking about. Right? So very semi-superconductors.

I'm not going to. What am I saying this? Superconductor, right? And because at the moment, most of them, there are some superconductor-based quantum computings, computers out there. But again, you have to have them very, very cold. Interesting. If you get them room temperature. That's why people were so stoked about that.

I thought it was just like about making trains go super fast. Oh, no, no, no. Yeah, but the thing is about if you have superconductors, you've got zero resistance, zero impedance. So you can literally have, no end of energy. Braille guns. Yeah, you could have everything. It's amazing.

The conductor, they already have conductors on trains, bro. And they're super in my book. Okay. Yeah, it'd be amazing. Like the amount of energy you get from a power station is insane. But I'm not doing this joke.

I'm not playing along, Teach. You made the same-faced trust that made when he's been listening to him. Also, you're just like, huh? Like, I just watched it just defined by zero for a second. All right, Teech, that was pretty good. That was pretty good. Thank you.

Thank you. I literally thought that's the joke you were making. I thought you were saying the trains thing for doing the conductor joke. No, no, no. I was just being serious because I thought it was just about, like, being able to transfer things super fast and see breezy. I thought you were setting me up for it. Like, yo, all right, I'm bumping over here.

Like, be ready to spike this. Okay, so is it really just like, okay I'll just put my cards on the table it seems to me like a crazy conspiracy to try and break the internet and be able to get back doors into everything that's why people are super interested in it like I don't that's not the main one but there's like there's loads of other things like good the other one they were talking about is like yeah molecules and such right so this isn't the exact paper that the they're talking about in there the actual paper that that google published at the moment which is I'm going to say the title because it sounds fancy anyway observation of

constructive interference at the edge of quantum ergodicity. They did use the term ergodic in there, and I had to look up what ergodic meant, and then when I looked it up, I had no idea what it meant. It's like, what's the first word? I've ever read the definition, and I was like, can't figure that one out. Yeah, I wouldn't worry too much. Hold on. For those that don't know, let me just give you, let me just give you like a, just a quickie

in this paper. Hold on. I have it up here, right here. This is the thing with erotic. It goes like this. As entanglement growth with size or whole, as entanglement grows with system size or evolution time, the resulting dynamics are often ergodic. And I was just like, I don't know what that word means. I was trying to read the paper.

And erotic is relating to or denoting systems or processes with the property that given sufficient time, they include or impinge on all points in a given space and can be represented statistically by a reasonably large selection of points. that was way too many words you said. Again, go back to the drunk man in a field. Eventually, he'll hit every single point in the field if he doesn't escape it. Right? Yeah, real. Okay, yeah.

That's another way of explaining that. I can follow that one. I can follow that one. Okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Bring it down to the drunk man in the pool level. They got it. I'm going to start saying that all the time.

The entire board. Okay, I see what you say. Yes. Yeah, that's what it means, yeah? That's all it is. And when they say state, in this case, or a space, when they don't mean literal, like, a space.

in a field, they literally mean like, oh, it could be like there's three bits. Like, could it be in all three bits, different states of that? That's all that means. It's like a very abstract conception of what a space is, the possible, like, probability space or the state space. I love how you keep saying words, and it's just, I think I'm like hard-coded on my clarity at this point. Yeah, I'm so used to believing, yeah, all these words. There's too many words. It makes sense.

Yeah. Okay. I'm like, LTEG is like, I don't know anything. And then he started saying a bunch of smart things. I was watching videos too. Guys, I'm pretty much a quantum expert. I like everyone else on Twitter, I spent one day researching it and I know everything.

These are my notes. Suproposition, entanglement can be both values at once, has to be cold. Those are like fucking stuff. That's a lot. That was my summary of everything I learned. And then we went far beyond that. I was like, yeah, I can't be in this conversation anymore.

Trash, those are. Those are good notes. Honestly, most every, like, every quantum competing article should start with those because even just, hey, you're going to have to as far as we can tell, keep this at basically zero. You're like, oh, so not everyone's going to have one in their basement. Like, it's already like, you're just not going to happen, at least for a while. I'm going to start saying erotic. That's a big learning, trash, put that one into it. But that is just a fancy word. They're just stupid physicists using stupid words is all I'm saying. Okay. By the way, I also brought props today because I actually have got some molecules to exactly. Yeah. I have loads of these.

Cubits? What you got there? Yeah, yeah. Right. Oh, no, I've just broken this one. Oh no. Where do I put that back? See, if that was...

Cyan. But we have blown up if that was a... This one, I think some people might know this. This is just glucose. It's sugar. That's just sugar. I had no idea. That was glucose.

Dude, trash. You should know that one, bro. I eat it. I'm consuming. I don't know those. I am getting from this stream. It's adrenaline. Right.

I'm just making some props. Nice. Oh, nice. So there you go. There's adrenaline. Okay, so then explain why do quantum computers matter for seeing the shape of these? So a lot of these things is that, not those particularly there,

but it would say it was something like proteins specifically, because a lot of medicine is based around figuring out proteins and their shapes of them. Because they may know the chemicals, like, representation, but they don't actually know how it's oriented. Now, I know there's a lot of people doing that with, like, manually doing this and such. but if you can get a quantum algorithm to actually just figure it out

that's much better right weird enough AI is doing a really good job at the moment of this yeah that's one place AI's been really good at yeah yeah because it's effectively

it's again statistical this ergodicity thing figuring out all this it's a searching algorithm and quantum stuff is really good for searching for things that's where the quantum space is all doing it's like it's doing all the different searches

around by a probability so if you can find the right orientation and like mapping of a certain molecule, then it helps. Like again, here's his adrenaline. Look, there's a floppy tail here. And imagine this is a fancy thing. Like sometimes it could be the orientation, like,

oh, this is the lowest energy level in this orientation, rather than this one, which is very, like, high energy or something. For adrenaline, that makes sense. Yeah. I'm kind of doing it up. But I got props, okay? Yeah. So let me just walk it back to make sure I'm understanding.

We've got molecules, they exist. We believe in molecules. I'm following so far. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The shape they are actually makes a difference because, like, we do stuff like inhibitors and receptors and all this other crazy stuff. They got to, like, match up next to each other, like in physical, real space. Like, it actually matters whether it's a curly cue or whether it's a straight line for the medicine to work. Otherwise, it, like, doesn't block the thing or it does block the thing.

Yep. Okay. So then we're saying we got to figure out what they look like because that actually matters for us to try it. And we got to try like a lot of different kinds. Maybe adding one little more little guy here or doing one little guy over here or something else. It's going to change the shape a lot. What's the most likely shape that they're going to be so that they can do the medicine-y thing or whatever, right? That's a good answer.

Okay. So then we're saying we have this really big search problem that follows a bunch of probabilistic rules. That seems like a good example of where maybe we could find or narrow the search space. Like in the bouncing ball example, which we didn't get to show Casey today, but maybe we'll get a separate clip of showing Casey that and just put it into the episode right here. I don't know. They're like, this is 13,000 times faster for this random thing. So you're saying, okay, we could search for the shapes of the molecules, like in this example,

13,000 times faster than we would with old classical computers. So we could test like a lot more different kinds of drugs faster and more cheaply, and then we could make new medicine. Yeah, this is, yeah, there's another pole point of quantum computers. Yeah, it's one of those where it's like, it's effectively most of these, are searching algorithms. Got it. When you think, look at all, most of quantum algorithms,

are all forms of searching algorithms. Right. Okay, so does that mean that the, you know how there's like the, I donate my computer to medical science, and it goes and it does a bunch of protein looking and all that? Yeah. Is that effectively because,

I mean, because even if Willow was a thing, it only runs in Larry's basement. Therefore, the donating your computer to science is still producing an absolute term. Currently, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Much much, yeah. Even though it's 13,000 times faster than a super

computer is just like, well, we have a million people doing it. So it's like, this one always wins because it's just so much easier. Yeah, the moment, at the moment, but the whole point is if you get these bigger, faster and everything, because that 13,000 times one is they're talking about this specific algorithm, which I think they're not in the paper, but in like the articles I was reading, not the paper itself, they were calling it quantum echoes. What it means is they're like, it's how fast you can scramble this data, then unscramble it. That's effectively the algorithm they're talking. It's like a scrambling, unscambling. That you've got eggs, you scramble it, then you figure out how we eat it unscrabble the eggs.

And then they're able to do it 13,000 times faster than the biggest supercomputer at the moment, apparently. Which is impressive. Mm-hmm. But again, it's this very specific algorithm they've designed it for. Yeah, and if you need to change the algorithm, you'd have to refab the chip and everything. So there is, like, limitations and time and change and unknowns in the problem. So every time you hit a roadblock, you're like, all right, back to the classicals because we've got to do a year. And I actually wonder what failure rate for those chips are.

Like how many chips they have to be made to make them work. Because I know like in Silicon, like a lot of chips is bad. Well, they say statistically in the US entanglements don't, you know, like 50% of entanglements end in separation. So I'm not sure how long these chips actually lasts for. Yeah, I mean either. Is that a real statement that you just said? One party, one person in that relationship goes cold. He made a divorce joke, bro.

Oh, oh, okay. As soon as he said it, I just got so confused. Like, my eyes just like widen on that stuff. Like, well, hold on. Did I miss something? Why is it only in the youth? West, this is crazy. Dude, that's pretty much,

that's pretty much the plot of the Dark Forest trilogy. It is kind of sad that all my quantum knowledge comes from the dark, it comes from that, the three body problem. Hey, that's a good book. It's a good book. Yeah, but is this also

like a Christopher Nolan documentary or is it real? It's also a documentary. Which one's weird? The book. no not the show The show was terrible The show made no I've only seen the show I didn't read the book

No I like the show Because I didn't read the book Dress you have to say that bro I think The show has to be even more confusing Without the book It's like super

Like I was watching I'm like what the hell's even happening here Anyways okay we gotta get back We gotta get back on topic We can't be talking about that That show I don't you know what the topic should be It's like

I was like so where we go from this. Okay. I've got, I'll do another one then. What are the odds that we have a, like, or maybe a better answer or a question would be,

what is the timeline you expect? Because, so what I found very funny is Google is like, bro, this is the first time anyone's ever even done anything with a quantum computer. That's like what they said. I felt like it was like,

this is the first time anything's ever been done. And it's way faster than, classical computer at solving this thing that only quantum computers would care about, which I was like, okay, sure, fair enough. So like, let's say, I mean, they may throw a billion dollars at something to make it help them find a particular drug. So that, but that does, in my mind, that doesn't really count. That's just like saying, we spent a bunch more money on something to do what we could have done with regular computers. Like, imagine how many, how many AWS lambas you could rent for a billion right to run your thing so like where do you have any guess or any feeling of when like a commercial

application not a research project like a commercial application is like oh we rented out google's willow chip for a week so we could run drug tests and it was cheaper for us than the equivalent you know classical computer is there like a time line right because wouldn't that be the problem just be a drug test would have to be like unique and bespoke and handrail they have some stuff to run some like some amount of it. of reprogramability onto the chips, I think, but it's not like a, you can't write like a four loop. You're putting like the gates and connecting them and they probably have some stuff. So I think it's not literally full refrab every single time.

I have no idea on the timeframe is all I can say is. Okay, cool. That's my answer. I have no idea. I was in an interesting talk in 2010, which was like the future of quantum computing. And it was at MSU. And he was talking about by 2025, the government was saying that you should be like more quantum secure. And by 2028, you should be like, you should not have any RSAs left was kind of the time frame.

And so now we're kind of arriving to this time where it's looking like things are actually kind of falling into place where, yeah, maybe in three to five years, something could be, you know, they could start hacking, you know, maybe only like 1K RSA, even though we're at 4K. But that's not, that's only going to take an extra couple bits before we're at the next level. And so I was very curious. if you believe in his hypothesis, which the guy standing there was, he made a really great hypothesis, which was if the government tells you by this time you should be secure, the government already has that technology and is just like a way ahead of the curve. Do you think that the government actually has good quantum technology at this point? It's just not releasing Area 51 space lasers and shit, or is it just like or is this all fake? That's a good question, actually.

Yeah. Sometimes the government had technology before the public does, a long time before. Yeah. But the question is, do they have this? And I, sometimes the government also just has, like, random advice, which is, like, pulled out of nowhere. Like, they sometimes do this. Like, just to sound like, well, make sure we're up to date. Like, yeah, make sure it's by 2028 guys.

We were totally overfung or not kind of thing. Like, I don't know. It's like. They're still running Cobol. Make sure you're up to date, everybody, by 2028. Yeah. But they might do. This is the thing.

if they do, we aren't going to know. And if I did know, I wouldn't be able to say anyway because I'd probably under the official secrets act. So, which I have already signed before for a previous job, but like, yeah. Yeah. Gingerbill confirms government conspiracy online.net right now.

Secret secrets are no fun. If I knew, I probably won't be able to tell you. And if I didn't know, I still got to him. He's got a great point. I got from my tinfoil hat on. We all need a quantum example. You're helping us understand quantum computers right now. Exactly.

You know, here's how you measure it. There might be an actual state of me knowing. It's just your knowing of it is you've only got a probabilistic underknowing of it. That's it. That's it. I got an ergodic keyboard right here. So, Andrew, can I buy some ergodic office furniture? Trash then, he's like, I need some ergodic supplies. And manager says, okay, trash orders a bunch of alcohol and goes get to drunk in the field.

Just walk around him. backyard. That's a way to learn physics. We're going to get so organic right now? You want to get erotic this weekend? I'm impinging all the points in a given space. I don't have any other questions. I would just like to say that I left with some new knowledge.

But I mostly left with the same questions I've always had. Yeah. Okay. So this technology really, because we never even got to like the fact that there There's people that are throwing out terms. I've seen this happen, especially with a lot of the clickbait, like, I'm going to trick my uncle into believing something videos, which is just like, just wait until the quantum AI revolution happens.

Is that, I assume that's not a real thing in any sort of capacity. No. And that everything they're saying is just words that are too, I just assume there are just two words next to each other that sound very fancy, but have no actual value or meaning. Okay. It does seem like. If you ever heard the word quantum talking about anybody who's not a physicist,

just assume they're bullshitting you. But pretty much always, right? Do you think Ginger Bill, though, since AI is like a big matrix multiplication thing of, you know, probability distributions? Like that there could be potentially like someday AI, like a quantum AI could use the stuff. Maybe. Maybe they would do that in the day. But I mean, any time soon at the moment, assume it's BS. Yeah, that makes sense. And TJ, is it really just probability distributions?

Or, hear me out, is it just a really confusing compression algorithm? Which one? AI. Yes. It's very lossy compression. I think it's a very lossy compression algorithm, actually. I think AI is, I would say it's more of a, it maps ideas into higher dimensional spaces. And then it points in certain direction towards those things, which that's why it makes me feel more like quantum stuff, because it also has a state vector.

like and that's why words get associated with each other because they're near each other in the same space but i don't work at open a i don't work at open a i so sam altman hasn't told me if we've achieved aGI internally or not i'm just doing this for the love of the game he'll tell you don't worry he gets sore a video directly i'm saying that already yeah true yes all right well i guess i guess i'll to tell my uncle about quantum AI being a lie. Which, by the way, is how I heard about all this. Just like, dude, what the hell is all this quantum AI business? I'm like, father, I don't understand those.

I'll call my... Individually I struggle with, let alone together. I'll call my closest thing to a quantum physicist friend, and we'll work on this together. Thank you for answering the age-old Facebook question. So that should really help. I'll report back on my mom's wall right now. Mom, we don't have to worry.

I forgot they called it a wall. I was such a good poll. I don't even think I could have done that. I've not been on Facebook in over a decade, but do you still have to like people say that what their status is and such like that or anymore or no? People still use that thing. I don't, but...

I'm logging into Facebook. Right now, I'm going to say on... Oops. On a podcast. I did try it. I did try, like I logged back into Facebook because I just got so... curious just to like see it does it still exist and i went back there and i realized the old things that i set myself up as are still like what i'm defined as on facebook oh so it says i'm in

a domestic partnership with my wife and uh what's it called and i'm still i'm still a rocket scientist nice jesus incorporated is where i work as a rocket scientist here you go guys on a podcast on a podcast oh right you can still do it wow Okay. Dangerous game pulling up your Facebook. I was pretty sure it was fine. Fine. Wow.

Okay. I don't have anything on there that is cancelable. I've got lots of embarrassing posts from me and my then-girlfriend, now wife, from high school. Oh, I miss you so much. At 4 p.m. Like, we haven't seen each other in an hour. Have to post it on each other's walls. I haven't seen each other since your high school math class together just an hour earlier.

Yes, so. Miss you, babe. I'm in sports class right now. I just really spiked volleyball. It's hot about you. It's tough. It is painful to read. I did download my Facebook export a while ago and just poked around inside.

What is it? Just like a J-C blog or stuff? You can download everything, trash, everything, all your DMs, all your posts, everything. And let me tell you, you do not want to do that, trash. You are going to think I look like the biggest loser of all time. I want to take it. that and then I want to do a little fine tuning.

You're going to train as Prime 10 years ago or 15 years. Teen Prime. Teen Prime GPT. Prime Book. Prime book. Yeah. Okay. Well, this has been absolutely fantastical. So thank you very much,

Bill, for being on here. You know, I would say that the biggest takeaway hopefully everybody has is that all those posts and articles that you see all the time are just a bunch of probably just a bunch of hogwash for at least the next decade is what it sounds like. You never know,

maybe there will be some amazing breakthrough that will change the entire field completely, but if the field is just iterations, we're just going to be, we're going to be waiting a long time until we see anything fantastic. Thank you, everybody, for being a part of the stand-up, Ginger Bill.

As always, you are fantastic. Ginger Bill, made Odin because C sucks. Check out Odin-Lang.org. That's it. That's it. That's like a rod burgundy. I couldn't remember if it's dot com or dot-com. I'm Charles Barkley

I'm Charles Barkley and I'm an asshole What is he saying? I mean, dot com works apparently as well So yeah, dot org or dot com doesn't matter Oh nice, you got both of them Okay Yeah Nice

And then of course we have Teage I don't know if you know who Teach is But he produces courses for boot.compte dot dev Boot.com slash teage correct I would use promo code BTW for both of us Well I was going to get there I was going to get to my view of M Nightshire Marmalon

Oh with a Twitter All right, I am Prime. Of course, I'm just going in order the boxes I see. I am Prime. I also have courses on boot.com. Boot.com slash Prime. But if you like TJ and I equally, you can do boot. dotev slash, by the way, for 25% off.

And both TJ and I will get paid. Lastly, we have with us Trash Dev. Trash Dev. I don't have anything I can promote of you other than your Twitter. Go check out Trash's Twitter where he will promote anything and everything. So just slide a DM and be like, hey, you got a cryptocurrency. Hit me up. He'll chill that.

He works for Yum Earths, buddy. Send him some Yum Earths. I'm seeking food sponsorships. Like, seriously. I think that's my next calling. Not even kidding. I'll chill for food. I will let you have a food sponsorship on this podcast.

Add infinitum with no money attempted to grab into it. If you can bring it your own. Completely separate. Bring your own sponsor. Be YOS. Make sure it's human food sponsorship as well. Okay. No bully sticks and stuff.

bull sticks exactly I don't think that intro made it onto the recording so they're not gonna hear no I know why that's a joke it's great thank you very much for joining us this is the stand-up bye everybody