The Classical Channel

meowzz

6:01 PM

(Tho not new tags) I vote cryptocurrency gets merged into post-quantum-crypto

Mithrandir

@meowzz that should probably be a discussion on Quantum Computing Meta

meowzz

do we need pegasus as a tag?

Mithrandir24601

@meowzz that's a fiddly one - post-quantum crypto refers to classical methods of cryptography that a QC can't break, while I don't see any reason for a quantum cryptocurrency to not exist

meowzz

should the tag be updated to quantum-crypto then?

0

Q: Merge #Crytpocurrency with #Post-Quantum-Crypto

Seems like the cryptocurrency tag could be merged with the post-quantum-crypto. Alternatively, perhaps we could change the cryptocurrency tag to be quantum-crypto or quantum-cryptocurrency?

discussion

Anonymous

I think it is fine as it is

Mithrandir24601

6:09 PM

@Blue that sounds like an answer :P

meowzz

an additional benefit of changing the tag would be for better search indexing

Mithrandir24601

:45461289 yeah, I agree that we don't want too many things starting with 'quantum'

Anonymous

Adding "quantum" in the beginning of tag names is a bit cliché, given this is already a "quantum computing" site

Anonymous

Sorry, clicked the delete button by mistake

Anonymous

This mobile app sucks

Mithrandir24601

6:11 PM

@Blue I can probably undelete?

Anonymous

@Mithrandir24601 Well, already re-posted the message :P

Anonymous

So all's good

D-Raz

Hello

Anonymous

Anyhow, let's at least write out the tag wikis for 5 tags today

Mithrandir24601

@Blue yep... I'm also on my phone :/ Not the easiest thing to type with

Anonymous

6:12 PM

chimera

Anonymous

and pegasus

Anonymous

say

Anonymous

What should we write?

meowzz

it's really bad on mobile. a bit better if on chrome if you request desktop site

Mithrandir24601

@D-Raz Hi! If you want to introduce yourself, feel free!

Anonymous

6:13 PM

@D-Raz Hi!

Anonymous

BTW is energy-relaxation an useful tag?

D-Raz

I got caught up in the following HNQ from this stack. quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/2499/…

Anonymous

@D-Raz Heh, that's gotten famous ;)

D-Raz

I was following some discussions in the comments and noticed that they have been cut short. I tried to see if the comments that were removed were placed in a chat somewhere but can't seem to find them.

Discrete lizard

@Blue Some of those tags seem a bit redundant, such as quantum-complexity-theory, asymptotic-complexity and classical-computer (we have classical-computing) . I think merging/removing those might work better than writing descriptions.

D-Raz

6:17 PM

Have they been place into a separate chat room or have they been outright deleted?

Mithrandir24601

@Blue sounds like a potential synonym of quantum-decoherence, depending on what people think?

Anonymous

@Discretelizard The classical-computer is obviously unnecessary. Removed it.

Discrete lizard

Although asymptotic-complexity is rather too specific than redundant, I guess.

meowzz

i have some ideas, but i'm curious what the official stance is on why that post is ok (it seems blatant it's an opinion post & what the author's opinion is)

re: pie in the sky

Anonymous

@Discretelizard I don't think we need that either, but I'm a bit hesitant to remove it without a second opinion

Anonymous

6:20 PM

It's too specific. This isn't a CS site. So all complexity questions should preferably fall under one tag

Mithrandir24601

@D-Raz they've been deleted as they didn't have anything to do with clarifying or improving the question etc. But were soapboxing, among other issues

Anonymous

Should complexity and complexity-theory be merged? @Mithrandir24601

meowzz

@Blue "This isn't a CS site" i agree. vanilla cryptocurrency fits better there imo

Discrete lizard

@Blue I agree, the tags complexity and complexity-theory have the most uses. I think these don't really mean anything different (although, second opinion on that I guess?). I think having them merged is a good idea.

Anonymous

Yeah. I too think they should be merged.

Mithrandir24601

6:23 PM

@meowzz The theoretical answer is 'it should work', the experimental answer is 'we haven't got one'. If you feel it's opinion based, feel free to flag or Vic but I just don't feel I can justify hammering it closed

Anonymous

@D-Raz They had been deleted due to some controversial comments

Mithrandir24601

@Blue I'm not so sure. At the minute, maybe(?) but I wouldn't say that as a general rule

Anonymous

@Mithrandir24601 Well, unless something considerably different comes up

Anonymous

But at the moment complexity and complexity-theory are basically the same tags

Mithrandir24601

@Blue ask me again tomorrow, when I can check on a computer and I'll have a better look than what I can do now

Anonymous

6:26 PM

@Mithrandir24601 Okaies

Anonymous

Or @heather could do it too

Anonymous

4 mins ago, by Blue

Should complexity and complexity-theory be merged? @Mithrandir24601

Anonymous

@heather ^

Mithrandir24601

@Blue also that. Also sounds like something for a meta post?

D-Raz

@Mithrandir24601 @Blue Were the comments too inflammatory to be moved in a new chat room?

I just wanted to see what was said but I'm happy to drop this if that is how this stack operates.

Anonymous

6:28 PM

@Mithrandir24601 Ehh, it looks too obvious for a meta post. All the answers will be certainly "yes", since the tag wikis of both say exactly the same thing

Anonymous

@D-Raz Not so much inflammatory, but more of crackpot-ish. I dunno if you're allowed to see them. Maybe ask the mods

D-Raz

@Blue I don't know why - but I like to read the debates no matter how outlandish :)

Mithrandir24601

@D-Raz some were. In this specific case, the person writing many of the comments is chat banned, so overall, moving to chat was pointless

D-Raz

@Mithrandir24601 Ok. Thanks for your time :)

Discrete lizard

@meowzz While the question at least partially is promoting the opinion that QC is a 'a pie in the sky', it seems most answers have interpreted the question as a 'challenge' to motivate the contrary. I guess posting a rather controversial opinion as a question is not entirely in line with the rules. On the other hand, I don't think this question would have generated as much attention if the opinion was worded less strongly.

Mithrandir24601

6:35 PM

@Blue I'm not sure how things work for this :P some were r/a, so I wouldn't go round showing them. I don't see any harm in sharing specific comments that were otherwise deleted? But I'd need to check

heather

hmm?

should they be merged

Anonymous

@heather Well, the answer to that is obviously "yes". It was more of a request for merge :P

heather

i see. well my first thought is "yes" because they look the same

@Blue oh gotcha

okay

Quantum Computing Meta

0

Q: Merge #Crytpocurrency with #Post-Quantum-Crypto

Seems like the cryptocurrency tag could be merged with the post-quantum-crypto. Alternatively, perhaps we could change the cryptocurrency tag to be quantum-crypto or quantum-cryptocurrency? The benefit of updating the tag would be additional search engine indexing.

discussion

heather

hmm, how to do that

@Mithrandir24601 do you know how to do that?

oh nvm

Anonymous

6:38 PM

@heather Do what? Merge?

heather

there's a convenient "merge" button

Anonymous

Yeah, should be

heather

okay, should be merged now

Anonymous

JD's bounty is due in 4 days while he won't be back for 5 days. Tough luck :P

Anonymous

@heather Cool!

meowzz

6:40 PM

@Discretelizard i see that is has value in driving attention/traffic to the site & being a good source of rebuttals for others who run into that way of thinking. i personally don't think opinion questions are bad. it's more that the community stance seems to be "no opinion posts" ( quantumcomputing.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/267/… )

heather

@Blue oh, that's unfortunate. i truly did not intend that.

meowzz

@Discretelizard via @heather : "Do you think quantum computing will become the next big thing?" That's not on topic." "Is QC pie in the sky?" is the inverse of "is it the next big thing?"

Mithrandir24601

@meowzz it's a good subjective/bad subjective thing, really

heather

well...i'm personally of the opinion that "is QC pie in the sky" is not a fabulous question. but the community seems to disagree.

anyway, also what @Mithrandir24601 said =)

Anonymous

@heather nvm. I'm getting 150 at least :P (unless someone conjures up a super-answer in the meantime)

Anonymous

6:42 PM

@heather I don't like it either. The current close vote on it, is mine

Anonymous

I partially answered it as a dare from JD XD

heather

@Blue as a general principle you shouldn't answer questions that you believe shouldn't be on this site.

however, i can understand answering it; I saw JD's comments (then deleted them).

Anonymous

@heather In principle I don't agree with that logic, since sometimes bad questions can have good/informative answers. At least while answering that I found out Scott Aaronson's nice article, which I wouldn't have found otherwise

Mithrandir24601

It is a valid research question though

heather

@Blue the rule stems from the "answering crap encourages crap" philosophy, which is especially true on sites where homework questions are a problem.

Anonymous

6:46 PM

But then there are some questions which I don't feel like answering at all, and directly vote to close them along with a downvote

heather

see also: rep whore on SO, though that is a (mostly) deprecated term for hopefully obvious reasons.

@Blue true.

i'm not saying it's a black and white situation.

Mithrandir24601

@Blue just because a question should be closed doesn't make it bad though! Similarly, just because a question's bad doesn't mean that it should be closed

heather

however, i'm saying that a consequence of closing is not allowing answers. if you vtc, you implicitly are saying that this question should not be answered.

if that makes any sense.

Anonymous

@Mithrandir24601 Well, I'd call JD's question more of a layman question rather than a bad question :P

Anonymous

Also, it's opinion-based

Anonymous

6:48 PM

But yet there's are some interesting points to discuss about it

meowzz

@Mithrandir24601 asking if something is 'pie in the sky' is a valid research question?

Anonymous

And not discussing those would deprive future visitors of that information

Anonymous

@heather Eh. I look at closing more of an indication that "the question should be reworded"

Anonymous

Rather than "no answers should be allowed on that indefinitely"

Mithrandir24601

@meowzz 'pie in the sky' is the wrong phrase :P But yeah, I believe the odd arxiv preprint has been published making the argument that it won't happen

meowzz

6:51 PM

i like @niel's airborne pastry & flying fig rolls :P

Mithrandir24601

@Blue either is a valid reason

meowzz

i may be thinking of using the airborne pastry theme for a series of version names for some software

tehe

Anonymous

@Mithrandir24601 Well, depends on the context and the perspective, yeah

Discrete lizard

@meowzz The sentiments behind them are sort of inverse, yes. But IMO one seems more answerable than the other. I took 'pie in the sky' to mean "Is QC leading nowhere", which can be (and has been) answered by referring progress that is leading somewhere. "Is QC the next big thing" is, as far as I'd interpret it, somewhere in between asking whether I think QC is hip and trendy and predicting the future.

I think the problem here is that showing QC has some value is a lot easier and can be approached more objectively than showing it has 'a lot' value.

heather

I agree with @Discretelizard's point - there has been true scientific debate over whether or not QC will "work".

there has been much journalistic debate over whether QC is the next big thing =P

Anonymous

7:01 PM

Why should we even care about value, lol. See the mathematicians keep doing Logic and Axiomatic set theory without thinking of value. Just quietly follow them, coz it's just exciting :P

Anonymous

(Pretty sure 0celo could provide a good justification along those lines XD)

James Wootton

8:25 PM

Sorry for missing chat. I forgot how time zones work

Quantum Computing

9:59 PM

0

Q: What is the matrix of the iSwap gate?

See question. Mostly I'm confused over whether the common convention is to use +i or -i along the anti-diagonal of the middle 2x2 block.

quantum-gate

Quantum Computing

10:17 PM

0

Q: If quantum speed-up is due to the wave-like nature of quantum mechanics, why not just use regular waves?

The intuition I have for why quantum computing can perform better than classical computing is that the wavelike nature of wavefunctions allow you to interfere multiple states of information with a single operation, which theoretically could allow for exponential speedup. But if it really is jus...

quantum-computer classical-computer

Transcript for