Yeah, well...
Yeah, well...
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/10902481
48 comments
-
Reminds me of a guy I worked with. He even started the occasional sentence with "contrary to fact" before telling me you can order super powerful quantum computers on Ali express that can run your entire steam library concurrently.
-
run your entire steam library concurrently.
What's hilarious about this assertion, is what the intersection of quantum computing and conventional gaming would look like. Quantum is, roughly, all about taking a vast array of possible outcomes for a system and collapsing all of that into a single, highly probable, result*. So running a game through a quantum computer would effectively "solve" it. So, enjoy watching the most statistically likely ending for every AAA game out there - no controller required.
(* "In linear time." Which is fancy computer science talk for "many orders of magnitude faster than the conventional way." But you still have to stack the math to make this work, which isn't always easy or possible.)
-
That's not what a "game" is. A "game" has interactivity and would not be solved by the computer automatically
-
Yeah, I’m picturing 500 headless window processes that – if you connected to them with a display – would show a different game screen variation of “press any key to start “.
-
TAS would like a word
-
That's kind of where I was going with this. I suppose human input itself could be solved using some quantum function, but the statistical average of all human input would probably not yield a successfully completed game. At least, if achievement metrics on Steam are anything to go by.
-
-
-
-
That's not how quantum computers work. They'd be terribly bad at doing the things that transistor-based computers do. They are run in a completely different way.
-
Why would you need a super powerful quantum computer for that?
-
Life races on, I have fewer and fewer hours in the day to game, and my Steam library is getting to 200 like I'm getting to 40. Hook me the fuck up Ali Express.
-
I had the Humble Bundle monthly subscription for a year. I'm at over 500 games with no hope to ever play them all, let alone best them.
-
Make sure your will hands the catalogue onto someone that will appreciate it. Mine's going to my goddaughter. She's only 14 but she fucking understands this shit and the value of it all. Hell of a legacy to just mistakingly let die off into the digital aether.
-
-
-
the bigger question seems to be that apparently those super powerful quantum computers run x86_64 architecture. Not sure its support for quantum commands though, seems like a waste of money just for the "quantum" name
-
Well in fairness, a quantum computer would probably be more like a GPU - you'd still need a CPU, and you'd use it to control the quantum piece for specific tasks
Quantum code is extremely different, we don't know how to write it well yet. Quantum processors are also only suitable for certain problems - they're not faster, they can just take a problem with a definite answer and skip looking through the problem space to collapse into a solution
It would be insane to rewrite an os for a far less efficient, hundreds of thousands of times more expensive quantum CPU than to just attach it to a normal computer
So a quantum computer would very likely use x64 Linux, and if so could probably run games... Except who knows if it even would even have integrated graphics, it would probably only ever be used as a server so that many people can queue up tasks... at least until we have several nobel-award worthy breakthroughs
-
-
-
48 comments