this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
-26 points (31.9% liked)

Technology

59882 readers
3113 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Google also says their AI is self-aware, has feelings, wants to marry the dev who blurted that out, etc...

[–] Death_Equity 7 points 15 hours ago

Wasn't that one dev who said that?

[–] NeoNachtwaechter 54 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Summary:
One googeling person managed to come up with such extraordinary BS that all the press is echoing it...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Stop looking at Luigi, and focus on this please.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I get that I may be getting wooooshed, but TechCrunch nearly exclusively covers tech tech (and, uh, gaming for some reason), which that entire thing is not a part of.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago

Your probably right

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Honestly, it's not as BS a claim as it sounds, but it is a deeply speculative one

[–] NeoNachtwaechter 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you read that original quote in the article. Speculation on many levels. No claim at all.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Now you're just being unreasonably pendantic

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago

This terrible headline keeps going...

Tldr; Completely misleading. Someone said it must use peocessing power from other universes because they are amazed by some of the results - not that anything proves anything related to a multiverse.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Can I go to a universe where google doesn't exist?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago

Not anymore!

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yes but Microsoft won smartphones war there.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Can you tell me how to get to that universe?

I fucking loved Windows Phone and was horribly mad that Microsoft bungled it, bought Nokia, bungled it further, then eventually gave up.

It was years ahead of the shit Apple and Google were doing, but good lord Microsoft just couldn't manage to figure out how to sell the thing, even with super amazing hardware, like the Nokia 1020.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 22 hours ago

M$ EEE-d Nokia then lost the phone market. Dumbasses.

[–] SlopppyEngineer 2 points 1 day ago

You can install the Square Home launcher and be back to the look and feel of the windows phone.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago

Google also said they wouldn't kill Stadia, a month before they killed Stadia. Maybe it still lives in another universe.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago

Google Quantum AI founder Hartmut Neven wrote in his blog post that this chip was so mind-boggling fast that it must have borrowed computational power from other universes.

The linked HackerNews thread speculates that the relevant comment was tongue-in-cheek.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago

Google says a lot of things.

[–] AbouBenAdhem 8 points 1 day ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Which is more likely: that Google's benchmarking system is wrong, or that quantum computing somehow takes place across hereto unprovable alternate realities?

I know which one I would pick.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

It's not really a case of their benchmarking being wrong: quantum speed advantage is a real thing, the point of argument is whether that implies parallel universes or not

[–] Sanctus 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Then let us go to a fucking good one.

[–] semperverus 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And ruin it for its current residents?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Would it just be us, not them over there?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

In the end, it would be just us...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So their processor is so powerful it somehow reaches out to another universe to use power for computation functions..? How do you even prove something like this?

[–] AbouBenAdhem 5 points 1 day ago

My understanding of quantum algorithms is that they set up parallel computations in such a way that incorrect solutions cancel out and correct ones reinforce each other. They indicate the existence of multiple universes to the same extent that the double slit experiment does.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Sounds like "Hyperion" plot to me

[–] jordanlund 5 points 1 day ago

But is it a simulated multiverse?