[MD] Quantum computing

[Magnus Berg]

Hi Case

Thanks for your post. It seems we're on the same page.

> Thanks for your effort to explain this. I appreciate the difficulty. I am
> left with many questions but the bottom line is "Bring it On". Who would
> have thought that Moore's Law would hold as long as it has? If we can jump
> start a whole new level I'm for it.

Level? Do you mean a MoQ level? Actually, I once argued to add a quantum level 
below the inorganic level. I even wrote a bunch of questions for Pirsig via Dan 
Glover but I don't know if they ever got there, Dan?

Anyway, the basis for adding a quantum level below the inorganic was mainly that 
  quantum patterns value a completely different set of laws than inorganic 
patterns. While inorganic patterns value gravity, electromagnetism, time, etc. 
the quantum patterns have no respect for these laws at all, not even time. This 
difference is the basis for a new level in my book.

> I guess I need to looking into the QC business a bit further for technical
> details but it seems one of your main points has gotten lost. At least in
> principle it is easy to imagine computers that are powerful enough to be
> considered sentient. This has been explored at some length in sci-fi, from
> Commander Data to Marvin, the HHGG robot with a Real People Personality.

Yes, you're right. I think they once mentioned that Data had a positronic brain, 
like Asimov's robots. But I don't remember if Adams ever wrote anything specific 
about Marvin's brain.

> Those with an anthropist bent or the MIMOAT crowd are going to look for any
> way they can to stay on top of the evolutionary game of King of the Hill.
> They remind me of the bunch who claimed "Man the Tool User" was unique in
> the world. Then we found chimps and even otters making and using tools. So,
> "Man the Speaker" and Possessor of Language was King for a Day until we
> taught a few chimps to use symbol systems and honeybee engaging in modern
> dance. Kind of gets down to " the Sole Owner of the Opposable Thumb"... Now
> that is special.

Yes, they are in for an unpleasant century, not only climate wise. Not sure how 
to make it easier for them. Sci-fi writers have been writing about exactly that 
crowd and their problems with AI/robots since they started writing sci-fi. But I 
guess that crowd doesn't read sci-fi anyway so they just have to get surprised.

> It is not so much the facts or principles that are at stake in whether there
> are or can be machine intelligence. It is pure chauvinism.  After all there
> are already bits of code out there displaying life-like properties. Viruses
> spread and reproduce themselves across the internet everyday. I even saw a
> headline in the Weekly World News (the last bastion of great American
> journalism) that computer viruses are being spread to humans... This was
> followed by an update on the World's Fattest Cat eating the World's Fattest
> Mouse and Satan's face appearing in the skies over Washington.

:)

On a serious note, computer viruses have been starting to merge, creating new 
viruses. This both makes it harder for antivirus programs and there's also a 
risk that the newly evolved virus is more dangerous than its parents.

	Magnus