NVIDIA announce Project Shield - new gaming handheld

[Sigma]

[manwhore]

holy fuck, this looks pretty awesome!

especially the 4k video streaming with no lag.

love the steam integration too.

i still want to wait to see what valves steam box can do though.

[Truth.]

Will most likely fail

[360]

I just don't think handhelds are the future. They will always be lower tech until quantum computing is cracked and goes mainstream, that is. But that's at least 5 years away. More like 7, maybe more, and even longer before it goes mainstream.

[Balzac]

unless i missed some huge recent breakthrough, quantum computing seems at least 30 years away to me.

[360]

unless i missed some huge recent breakthrough, quantum computing seems at least 30 years away to me.

They already exist, albeit for $10 million. It's really just a matter of time before they refine the process and it becomes available to the masses.

http://www.dwavesys.com/en/products-services.html

If you look at the transistor in the early 1950's and what it did for computing devices, it only took 20 years for the current iteration of computers with microprocessors and dynamic ram to go into mass production. In the 60's MIT had a computer under the current system that was worth millions, then 10-15 years later, computers with similar abilities became widely available to the public.

Now if you factor in kurzweil's law of accelerating returns, I stand by my estimation. Maybe add 5 years.

[360]

You know what? I will meet you half way and say 15 year, at most

[Balzac]

You know what? I will meet you half way and say 15 year, at most

i hope its that quick.


its definitely some fascinating shit

[ric]

@360
wow
can you post up a decent article/source on quantum computing and what the deal is and whats different and new about it?

[360]

Decent and interesting article: http://www.naturalnews.com/037512_Amazo ... uting.html

What the deal is & what's different and new about it: http://insidehpc.com/2012/10/14/video-q ... uting-101/
Vid does an excellent job on explaining the basics to laymen because let's face it, unless you are well versed in the field of quantum mechanics, we are all laymen or amateurs at best.


Also, wiki has a concise timeline on the progression/evolution of the concept of quantum computing, as well as the inception of various hardware elements: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_o ... _computing

[ric]

@360

thanks sir
just trying to wrap my head around it....

quantum physics is a theoretical framework which imagines/posits a small legion of subatomic particles and new forces/laws (ie string theory) which supposedly are the real forces/bits that unify the universe

quantum computing sets up a framework of circuitry which more efficiently uses tiny changes in electrons/electricity and thats really why you have to be so careful because electrons are sensitive and move around by themselves and with weak forces

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_10/7.html

correct me if im wrong here but...
it seems to me like 'quantum computing' is really a misnomer then. at least not actually really related to real quantum physics (at least as i understand it). im just saying its different usage of the word; im not saying its like false advertising. although it might be in an attempt to sound sweeter than it actually is and sell it like its string theory in action (use of the words 'quantum' 'qubits'/'quarks' 'vibrations' etc etc) because lets face it this shit is expensive and needs a huge amount of investment to make headway

[Balzac]

i would say quantum computing is very much an appropriate term. quantum computing deals with information (qubit) represented on a subatomic scale through subatomic particles. Being subatomic particles they behave according to quantum mechanical models and formulas. If a quantum computer didn't actually have a foundation on the subatomic level, exploiting the properties of a quantum environment wouldn't be possible, which is the whole basis of the crazy computing power these machines can achieve.

[ric]

@balzac
it seems to me that cubits are actually just measurements being sold as physical things/bits. what the cubit describes really seems to be a colorful/catchy way to talk about the process involved in superposition theorem (found in article below)

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_10/7.html

The strategy used in the Superposition Theorem is to eliminate all but one source of power within a network at a time, using series/parallel analysis to determine voltage drops (and/or currents) within the modified network for each power source separately

a cubit could be that 'one source of power' but then youre not talking about subatomic shit/electrons. the electrons are the subatomic particle that really matters here and that is the electricity which is the lifeblood of the superposition circuit. the electrons just really need to be cared for because they are naturally skittish things and thats why its so expensive and shit to maintain and house the environment they think the electrons need to act predictably and do what you want.

where am i going wrong here? im not trying to argue a point im trying to understand how it works

[Balzac]

i don't think it necessarily has to be an electron. It could be an atom, an ion, photon, or electron; anything that exhibits quantum mechanical behaviour. As far as how these things are actually measured/stored/physically laid out; i have no idea. That's one of the things that needs to be figured out. This field is still in its infancy, which is why my original prediction of 30 years seemed reasonable to me.

[ric]