Without meaning offense to anyone, I just don't understand how something as fundamental as this can be overlooked when writing a blog post. Personally, it gives off an impression that if the author didn't spend a second thinking about their audience and how they might read the blog, I become skeptical about the content itself (which is probably an overreaction on my part). I can't help it. The author might as well write the post in all caps or something equally detrimental to readability.
This appears to be the website of a Michigan State University physics lab. Assuming a random writer on the lab's blog designed the site seems a bit unreasonable. It's also unlikely a professional designer has ever touched this site, so...yeah, it's a bit unprofessional. I'm sure most of us would make embarrassing mistakes if we had to do something outside of our field of expertise and then subjected it to critique.
I think there's a valid point to be made that they should put more effort into accessibility, but trying to say a writer's science is suspect because the lab's graphic design is bad is just unreasonable IMO.
Yea, I can't help to think like that but as I said it is an overraction on my part.
Replacing Author with WebDesigner - How can a webdesigner design something so ridiculously un-userfriendly, entirely defeating the purpose of what a blog is supposed to do. These kinds of things bother me as I put myself in their shoes and try to imagine all kinds of things that person might have been caught up on - let's assume the best.
Thanks. Wow, "quantum software for finance industry using quantum algorithms for optimization, machine learning, and Monte Carlo simulations" is jumping the gun a bit.
Taking an algorithm for a QC and turning it into software for a QC is a very strange task not for the normal dev. I imagine many are offering software (QSoftware?)
I haven't seen anything - from any company - that makes me think we're anywhere close to actually having a quantum anything. It's like this decade's cold fusion. If I was a VC, I'd be crazy to expect any returns from any company working in the field.
Have you tried signing up for D-Wave Leap, and running optimization problems on their quantum annealer? It's not a gate model machine, but it is definitely a quantum computer, and it works and is available now.
People are holding out hope that gate model machines are going to be a holy grail, but so far the actual investments in real-life applications of QC are quietly going to efforts to solve optimization problems, which are a very ripe area in terms of potential for quantum supremacy.
Of course, Scott Aaronson hates them (mostly sour grapes at this point), and a lot of HN readers take his word as gospel...
14 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 45.9 ms ] threadFor anyone else that refuses to read ~2500 words in black text on a gray background.
I think there's a valid point to be made that they should put more effort into accessibility, but trying to say a writer's science is suspect because the lab's graphic design is bad is just unreasonable IMO.
Replacing Author with WebDesigner - How can a webdesigner design something so ridiculously un-userfriendly, entirely defeating the purpose of what a blog is supposed to do. These kinds of things bother me as I put myself in their shoes and try to imagine all kinds of things that person might have been caught up on - let's assume the best.
There are quantum computing software startups? What do they do?
Is there something I'm missing?
People are holding out hope that gate model machines are going to be a holy grail, but so far the actual investments in real-life applications of QC are quietly going to efforts to solve optimization problems, which are a very ripe area in terms of potential for quantum supremacy.
Of course, Scott Aaronson hates them (mostly sour grapes at this point), and a lot of HN readers take his word as gospel...