4:18 AM
@Discretelizard Appreciate the insight and noted. I just want to make sure this community is managed right. We're doing this because we love it, and we don't want to see anyone abuse it including Strangeworks staff.

2 hours later…
6:15 AM
Greeting from CQuIC (Center for Quantum Informatoin and Control)!
Thank folks to put this stackexchange zone up!

Anonymous
6:38 AM
@XiaodongQi Hey! Great to see you here. If you don't mind, please consider giving a brief introduction about yourself and your background. :)

Anonymous
Awesome that we're having more experts join in!

Anonymous
@Mithrandir24601 Sure. I'll do it as soon as I get home.

6:56 AM
@Mithrandir24601 Noted. Removed my yelling (assuming I know what you mean)

7:22 AM
Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room
Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room

Anonymous
I've added message feeds for meta and ticker feeds for the main site. If anyone has an objection, report.

7:38 AM
@Discretelizard Thanks :)
Mar 12 at 20:00, by Riker
please no ticker :(
(although a few others did want the ticker :P)

Anonymous
@Mithrandir24601 Let's try it out once. If more people object, I'll remove it

@Blue You could also have a message feed for the main site questions as well... (note: when I suggested this, while I don't think anyone disagreed, no-one actually agreed either)

@Mithrandir24601 The Ticker is the spawn of satan. Feeds are fine. Stick with one for bounties and meta for now

Anonymous
@Mithrandir24601 Ah, right. I'm doing that. We don't have more than 10 questions per day anyway

Blue has stopped a feed from being posted into this room

7:42 AM
@Blue Yeah, questions go slow, but steady,

@Discretelizard That's at least 3 of us then

@XiaodongQi No, thank you for joining us! Be sure to invite your friends and colleagues.

Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room

Anonymous
Okay, removed tickers. Everything will be posted as normal messages. If the load goes too high, we'll then see.

@whurley Oh, but I do think that this is appropriate behaviour. If SE staff links their blog network-wide, why wouldn't you link your blog here? Besides, I'm sure people would be very much interested to learn more about your mysterious... organisation.
Don't think we will get flooded any time soon.

Anonymous
7:46 AM
@Discretelizard Let's not push him...

Oh and since I can't just shut up: I must say that I do like the content we've gathered here so far. They appear to be high-level questions with thorough answers. Good job everyone! Keep it up!

8:01 AM
@Blue I'm sorry, but I'm going to put my foot down on this one. This isn't as bad as it seems because 1) If it truly is very very bad, you can convince Robert to change it. 2) In our current formative stage, it is good that there are suggestions which are borderline. Why? Because only by pushing our borders, we can find out what we want and what we don't. But for this, meta is essential!

Anonymous
@Discretelizard You're being difficult now. Before creating a new tag, I recommend discussing in the chat room.

@Blue And you're the one complaining about excessive talking of tags!

Anonymous
No, I'm not going to bother the SE staff for every useless tag name people create.

Anonymous
@Discretelizard No, I'm not.

@Blue No, I explicitly ask people to create tags freely.
@Blue ??? Taking it to meta is different from taking it to staff!

Anonymous
8:03 AM
@Discretelizard That's only your opinion, I'm afraid. I don't agree.

ON META
I mean, like I said before, BAD TAGS WILL BE KILLED AND BURNED.
@Blue No, it really isn't. I'll dig up some sources.

Anonymous
@Discretelizard "quantum-mythology" is a bad tag. If bag tags get used more and more it later gets difficult to remove them.

Anonymous
Change it to something that's actually meaningful

Anonymous
If you want it so badly

Oh and one more thing, in the end, massive community consensus is required to force people to change their posts significantly. Take care when editing.
@Blue Now that is an opinion
@Blue I think I've made it clear that I wont

Anonymous
8:05 AM
@Discretelizard Even that is an opinion.

@Blue Yes, let's call everything opinions. I'm sure that'll help (Ok, I started it, but still)

Anonymous
I guess I'm putting too much effort into this. I'll just downvote it and move on.

I mean, really, bad tags aren't such a big deal. On CS, we have like 6 tags of which the main purpose is to never use them!
@Blue Yeah, that's totally unwarranted, but sure, act on your dislike
I mean, your vote is your vote. None of my business.

Anonymous
Downvotes are not meant to show hate, just disapproval.

@Blue Well, that's one way to put it. I agree that you disapprove, but I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree for now.

8:11 AM
Oooh, @Blue Can you change the chat room name?
13

(The) Classical channel In quantum computing, a classical channel is a means of transferring classical information. The chatroom is a classical channel. Imagine all the ridiculous puns that will be enjoyed...

Anonymous
room topic changed to The Classical Channel: General discussion for quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com (no tags)

Anonymous
@Mithrandir24601 Done!

@Blue :D

Anonymous
@Discretelizard I'm sorry. I had to reject your tag wiki for that "quantum-mythology".

Anonymous
It isn't a standard word.

9:46 AM
@Blue God forbid we define our own terms! Don't you understand that tag usage guidance solves some of your problems with the name. Sigh, whatever I don't care. I do care about you following proper procedure here, so I'm not going to do anything unless it goes through proper channels.

10:14 AM
@Blue See this for more info on tags: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/18878/… . Although it explicitely states to not create new tags unless needed, BE AWARE THAT WE BARELY HAVE ANY TAGS! So, this is exactly the moment we should do the opposite and create a lot of tags! Also, why do you think creating a new tag is so easy?

Anonymous
@Discretelizard We already have a whole two pages full of tags!(quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/tags?page=1&tab=popular) Really, at this point we can't let people go on creating new tags without consulting with the community. It is my earnest request to please discuss with the community members in chat (if you don't have enough time to write a meta post). If more than one person agrees with you, you can go ahead with your tag creation.

Anonymous
Already the tag descriptions are missing from so many tags

Anonymous
If you really want to help the site, write the tag descriptions for the existing ones

Anonymous
Members with >750 can immediately accept or reject any tag description you description you write. Of course, if it is good, it will get accepted and you'll get +2 rep.

Anonymous
I also don't understand what's the problem in changing the quantum-mythology tag name to something like myths which is much more technically accurate. Remember, we are all technical people here.

Anonymous
10:23 AM
qauntum-mythology is a tag which can potentially attract a lot of crackpots. We already face such people regularly in Physics SE
2

Anonymous
They don't bother to read descriptions

@Blue Have you looked at other sites. Plenty more tags. Note that it is likely the tag numbers barely will change, we should expect the current tags to be used very often. If it turns out that, after a long time, in practice, tags are unused, then that is another reason to remove it. But that is too soon
@Blue That's what I DID. I've like done 4 or 5.
@Blue Why shouldn't we direct crackpots to counter-arguments of crackpottery. Think about it. This tag is basically a honeypot for them ;)

Anonymous
@Discretelizard Yes, I approved the other descriptions you wrote

Anonymous
I only had an issue with that one

But, really, I've said enough. I hope you agree on that, at least. Just leave it be for now. Let it be for a week, then look again and take it to meta if you wish to kill it.
@Blue Yeah, just mentioning for the record. Most people don't know this.
IMO, the more tags, the merrier (for now). We can clean up later. Now's brainstorming time!

Anonymous
10:34 AM
@Discretelizard Alright, let's wait an week. I'd like to hear others' opinion about this

@Blue Yeah, exactly. Which is why I suggested taking it to meta if you insist. But I think just waiting is for the best.
But well, you may disagree on that. Know also that re: scientists, TCS has a lot of tags that are even barely used (the have one for their 'arXiv classifications')

Anonymous
@Discretelizard You underestimate how much pain cleaning up can in slightly bigger sites. I used to be present during the Chem SE tag cleanup sessions. It took us months. Anyhow, I'll leave this topic for now

@Blue Also note that you're probably right that we need renaming (can we keep it as a synomym?) and also that I'm kinda trying to start an argument as this is the phase were such arguments are most useful. Fail hard and learn, as they say.
@Blue Yeah, we've said enough. Excuse me for taking the 'last word', but note that I think we should tag 'recklessly' because were are still small!
Better have bad tags now, than when there are 100 questions with bad tags!

Anonymous
@Discretelizard Which part are you referring to? Renaming of what?

@Blue The tag, which you suggested. I'm actually okay with having another name and have '' as a synonym (like quantum myths). But still, better to wait.
Also, I'm trying to argue with the best intentions here, not just because I like to have an argument :'

Anonymous
10:41 AM
@Discretelizard That would be a half-way settlement ;) I suggest let's talk a break for now. I got some work to do. See you

@Blue Yeah, see you. Good luck. I'm basically slacking off during a lecture ;)

Anonymous
*take

Anonymous
@Discretelizard :)

@Blue Oh and btw, part of this is cultural: the Dutch tend to try and create compromises.

10:57 AM
By arguing.
A lot

5 hours later…
4:19 PM
Just a half-hearted attempt, but curious about opinions in changing the cube to some (abstract) shape with more topical meaning?

@JustinYouens I like the idea. Maybe you can make a meta post about it.

4:58 PM
@Blue Ah, I didn't see you chat earlier...

Anonymous
5:14 PM
The message feed doesn't seem to be working...hmm

@whurley suggest just pay attn to votes for now. hopefully the community will be aware/ understand Strangeworks special status wrt the site, but there could be debate/ pushback at times. SE does have sometimes strict policies on "promotion" but theyre deliberately vague and generally up to mods to decide. whoever becomes mod(s) on the site will have a big impact on what is tolerated/ accepted/ leadership etc. ps watched your coloreful/ wild keynote. esp lol the part refd "weed" etc :P

Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room
Blue has stopped a feed from being posted into this room
Blue has stopped a feed from being posted into this room

@JustinYouens I just started a meta post based on your observation. quantumcomputing.meta.stackexchange.com/q/89/82

Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room
Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room
Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room
Blue has made a change to the feeds posted into this room

5:35 PM
@JustinYouens Looks decent. Hey, any chance that your designer can make some posters? I might spread them around campus to recruit more students!

Anonymous
5 messages moved to trash

Anonymous
5 messages moved to trash

Anonymous
Cool. The feed is working. It will stabilize after this.

Anonymous
@Discretelizard Heh, I so badly want a site t-shirt which I'd wear to college and spread the news :P

Anonymous
I could make one myself perhaps

5:43 PM
@Blue not a fan of new main site questions feed into the chat. why not just hit the main site?

Anonymous
@vzn Some people wanted it. Let's just wait and see their response. If too many complain, I'll remove it

@Blue didnt notice anyone asking for it? who asked for it?

Anonymous
10 hours ago, by Mithrandir24601
@Blue You could also have a message feed for the main site questions as well... (note: when I suggested this, while I don't think anyone disagreed, no-one actually agreed either)

Anonymous
@vzn

ok.
btw wondering, any idea how SE automatically made you room owner?

Anonymous
5:47 PM
@vzn Not sure. Maybe participation, total messages, etc

@Blue You're the top user in the frequently in room page, which I think is based of messages or something
@vzn Yeah, I asked for it. I don't remember anyone agreeing or disagreeing, so if anyone does actually disagree then I think it's fair to see if we can get an actual consensus either way

Anonymous
@Mithrandir24601 Possibly. I talk too much :P

Anonymous
6:03 PM
In real life, you'd never find me though. People complain that I talk too less.

@Blue Exact numbers have maybe changed since this was written, but:
21

Sure. In most cases, the room owner is more or less arbitrary, because it's just the person who was first to create the (e.g.) PHP room. But of course it makes sense to have several owners, especially for rooms that are quite active and have developed their own "style", and have those owners be p...

So yeah, it's based on the number of messages :)

Anonymous
6:40 PM
@glS Yeah, I think you're right. I don't see a direct way to put together the Everett's interpretation and quantum bogosort

Anonymous
7:29 PM
Reading through my answer on the bogosort question, again, it looked like a crackpot answer. Changed it substantially.

@vzn Ha ha agreed on mods. This is community run so I feel like that will all shake out. Re: keynote... yeah I'm colorful lol what can I say?

1 hour later…
8:54 PM
0

In this answer I mentioned that the CNOT, H, X, Z and $\pi/8$ gates form a universal set of gates, which given in sufficient number of gates can get arbitrarily close to replicating any unitary quantum gate (I came to know about this fact from Professor Umesh Vazirani's EdX lectures). But, is the...

@Feeds you have a really boring name...