| № | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | tourist | 4009 |
| 2 | jiangly | 3839 |
| 3 | Radewoosh | 3646 |
| 4 | jqdai0815 | 3620 |
| 4 | Benq | 3620 |
| 6 | orzdevinwang | 3612 |
| 7 | Geothermal | 3569 |
| 7 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
| 9 | ecnerwala | 3494 |
| 10 | Um_nik | 3396 |
| Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
| № | Пользователь | Вклад |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Um_nik | 164 |
| 2 | maomao90 | 160 |
| 3 | -is-this-fft- | 159 |
| 4 | atcoder_official | 158 |
| 4 | awoo | 158 |
| 4 | cry | 158 |
| 7 | adamant | 155 |
| 8 | nor | 154 |
| 9 | TheScrasse | 153 |
| 10 | maroonrk | 152 |
Hey Mike,
First of all, I hope you're doing well :)
It's almost very clear that Google has achieved quantum supermacy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZNEzzDcllU).
So, do we still have to write polynomial codes or you'll be installing such quantum computers for judging solutions?
Thanks!
Well, it is not the question of performance, I guess, you just always want to come up with the fastest algorithm possible. When it is not polynomial, you see constraints like $$$N \le 20$$$.
P.S. I wish Google rather made Chrome not eat entire memory of my PC.
It is a great technological achievement, but it isn't as much of a breakthrough as it is hyped.
Quantum supremacy has been achieved quite a long time ago. The new thing here is putting this into a programmable chip. But the programmability is still far from what we would need to call it a quantum computer.
Quantum computer does not exist yet, and it will take a long time before one is created.