shituationist

RE: https://tldr.nettime.org/@tante/116278661360029668

This is, I think, the story of the last few years. Software is tapped out. There is more software than can be sold. We are in a glut, and we've made it worse by stuffing word embeddings with code that can then be teased out with text prompts. All new software products are solutions in search of a problem, or actively polluting the Web with synthetic data extrusions of dubious quality at best, which threaten to saw off any usefulness of the Web as a technology by turning it into a playground for chatbots.

Mar 25 at 4:53amWeb
Show threadPaul Rietschka4d ago

@shituationist They obviously don't have the next bubble to push yet or they'd be moving on. They desperately want a quantum bubble, but there's not enough to it to properly push.

So they're stuck on the setting labeled "keep pretending any of this is working." We're in the middle of this desperate pretending, even though it's obvious none of this works in the least.

Worse, to recoup some of their massive losses, cos. will be doing layoffs for the next 2-4 years at least.

Show threadshituationist4d ago

@prietschka Quantum computing is in that "shit that ain't gonna happen" category. Not that it's impossible, or can't eventually be useful in some kind of advanced physics research, it's just that there's no commercial use cases, not on the order of selling shit to consumers like you can sell language model tokens for shitty image outputs or shitty copy writing.

https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2019/01/15/quantum-computing-as-a-field-is-obvious-bullshit/

Quantum computing as a field is obvious bullshit

I remember spotting the quantum computing trend when I was  a larval physics nerdling. I figured maybe I could get in on the chuckwagon if my dissertation project didn’t work out in a big way…

Locklin on science
Show threadPaul Rietschka4d ago

@shituationist From 2019.

And not a **thing** has changed in the non-field of "quantum computing."