Re: NANO: Amazing, isn't it?

Anders Sandberg (
Sun, 2 Feb 1997 22:14:17 +0100 (MET)

On Sun, 2 Feb 1997, Eugene Leitl wrote:

> what are the prerequisites for QC? Hyperprecise structures
> (molecular manufacturing)? Ultradeep temperatures (nanokelvins and below)?
> Weird states of matter (like EBC &c)? Appropriate timing (full moon)?

My guess is that it isn't as hard as we think it is, while still rather
tricky. The current experiments use trickery to get the quanta where we
want them; in a QC we have to be sure that they stay there even when we
aren't looking. Most likely hyperprecision isn't needed, quantum dots
might do quite well.

> > course, a KQb would still speed up things substantially, but to really get
> > into the singularity we need to reach the strongly intelligence augmenting
> > regime; a QAI might come in handy.
> QAI, by ANN, by QC? I dunno.

Well, at least it is anothe TLA. I wonder if QAI could make the old AI
problems with huge search spaces manageable.

> I think the "can't" sounds more plausible. If it was (has been) possible,
> we're living in a mockup. Newway's noncooperation assuming, the Cellticks
> are doomed to a Life sentence.

Ouch! Ladies and gentlemen, this year both the Most Obscure In-Joke and
the Worst Pun awards go to Eugene Leitl!

> > Yes, it is both reversible and could possibly become very dense. The
> > question is how long the coherence times and lengths can be made; the
> > last results suggest several minutes at least.
> Insider knowledge? Beware, Anders' evil experiment has transcended!

Oh, I was just referring to the bulk NMR quantum bits discussed in
Science. I'm completely innocent.

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