From everything we know about physics, making a useful quantum computer is "just" an engineering problem. And, with enough error-corrected qubits, you'd be able to solve problems of industrial relevance. But even the most optimistic case is qualitatively different from cryptocurrency and "AI". Anyone who day-traded could get into Bitcoin. Hundreds of millions of people have had "AI" products shoved at them. No one will be selling a quantum computer that spits out text resembling a college application essay. If you want to grift on quantum computing, you'll simply have less to work with. It'd be like trying to get hyperscaling from the synchrotron market. I think this will be true no matter what the QC companies manage to build, and no matter how people react to getting burned this time.
User has been escorted to the egress.
DRAMATIS PERSONAE
- Michael Shermer: dry and limp writer, horribly dull public speaker, sex pest
- Sabine Hossenfelder: transphobe, endorser of sex pest Lawrence Krauss, on the subject of physics either incompetent or maliciously deceptive
- Eric Weinstein: Thielboy, he totally invented a Theory of Everything, for realsies, honest, but the dog ate his equations
- Curt Jaimungal: podcast bro who doesn't even rate a Wikipedia article, but in searching for one we learn that he has platformed a Bell Curve stan
- Scott Aaronson: author of a blog named for a sex fantasy, he has the superpower of making people sympathize with a cop
- Chris Langan: racist, egomaniacal kook
The phrase "adorned with academic ornamentation" sounds like damning with faint praise, but apparently they just mean it as actual praise, because the rot has reached their brains.
Oh, man, I have opinions about the people in this story. But for now I'll just comment on this bit:
Note that before this incident, the Malaney-Weinstein work received little attention due to its limited significance and impact. Despite this, Weinstein has suggested that it is worthy of a Nobel prize and claimed (with the support of Brian Keating) that it is “the most deep insight in mathematical economics of the last 25-50 years”. In that same podcast episode, Weinstein also makes the incendiary claim that Juan Maldacena stole such ideas from him and his wife.
The thing is, you can go and look up what Maldacena said about gauge theory and economics. He very obviously saw an article in the widely-read American Journal of Physics, which points back to prior work by K. N. Ilinski and others. And this thread goes back at least to a 1994 paper by Lane Hughston, i.e., years before Pia Malaney's PhD thesis. I've read both; Hughston's is more detailed and more clear.
By 2029, the AI will even be capable of completing our TPS reports.
"Kevin Roose"? More like Kevin Rube, am I right? Holy shit, I actually am right.
From the r/vibecoding subreddit, which yes is a thing that exists: "What’s the point of vibe coding if I still have to pay a dev to fix it?"
what’s the point of vibe coding if at the end of the day i still gotta pay a dev to look at the code anyway. sure it feels kinda cool while i’m typing, like i’m in some flow state or whatever, but when stuff breaks it’s just dead weight. i cant vibe my way through debugging, i cant ship anything that actually matters, and then i’m back to square one pulling out my wallet for someone who actually knows what they’re doing. makes me think vibe coding is just roleplay for guys who want to feel like hackers without doing the hard part. am i missing something here or is it really just useless once you step outside the fantasy
(via)
Sneer Club Irreverently Pisstaking Yuddites
Looking at the replies and quotes of a Bluesky post that shared some anti-AI headlines, one definitely gets the sense that a segment of the population will greet the bubble popping with joy not seen since Kissinger died.
And because it's the LA Times, there's a chatbot slop section at the bottom to provide false balance.
I didn't get a message like "all quantum research is crankery" from the original post.