Re: NANO: Amazing, isn't it?

Anders Sandberg (
Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:39:32 +0100 (MET)

On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> We need *one* QC Cray to calculate protein foldings or evolutionary
> computation, and then we're home free. Ubiquitous QC seems unlikely,
> not on grounds of expense, but on the grounds that a single KQb
> (kiloqubit) will probably be enough to revolutionize the world beyond
> where "ubiquitous" has any meaning.

LOL! I'm going to remember that you said this, Eliezer! This sounds
exactly like the classic "The world market for computers will be around
eight of them".

I seriously doubt just one KQb will revolutionize the world; once you
start doing useful things with them (folding proteins, cracking PGP,
finding messages in Pi etc.) a lot of groups will want them, and the
dramatic results of their calculations will take longer to arrive than
people getting them. And besides, in a posthuman world QC might be the
matrix of choice, every little godling runs on them.

> "And the Lord said to Peter Shor: I COMMAND YOU TO BUILD A COMPUTER.
> The height shall be three hundred qubits..."
> -- Genesis, Act VI, Scene XIII.


Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension!
GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y