this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
74 points (90.2% liked)

Technology

59099 readers
3185 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

But how is the latency for online gaming? It'd be awesome if it's near instantaneous, or limited only by the net code.

Archive link

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] superkret 63 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Mom, can we have a quantum-entangled network?

Mom: No, we have a quantum-entangled network at home.

Quantum-entangled network at home:

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 19 points 2 months ago

That's just a demonstration of entropy. Every network rack without an admin to whack techs over the hands with a ruler will eventually look like this.

Tech 1: wow, I'm am so proud of this work

Tech 2: hmm, this bundle has a couple wires poking out and going in random directions, I don't need to pay attention to mine that much.

Tech 3: huh, racks a bit messy, no problem I'll just toss this here cable up and over the back

Tech 4: just drapes it across the floor

Tech 5: burns it down GOTO tech 1.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

How'd you get into my homelab?

[–] superkret 6 points 2 months ago

Snaked my way in through Layer 1.

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 months ago

I have an issue with the blue cable.

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Everyone hating on that setup are a bunch of morons.

There's a good reason to put your patch panels on a separate rack then all of your switches like that, because eventually you'll have to roll them around. At which point, you're going to need some slack in the lines, like when you're hooking up a tow line to your hitch.

That's all I see here: preparedness. Separate racks for switches and patch panels, and a lot of slack for when you got to roll them around, or some shit I don't know.

I just know that I see foresight and planning when I look at that picture, not sure why everyone else doesn't.

[–] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It'd be awesome if it's near instantaneous

I'm still gonna blame the lag

[–] QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's a big misconception with what quantum internet is (and what quantum entanglement actually allows for) as explained by this physicist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-j8nGvYMA8

Quantum Internet doesn't mean that you can transmit data faster than the speed of light.

Quantum Internet just means you get an ultra secure connection, but it's super susceptible to noise (in other words, you can't send a lot of data reliably and it would be terrible for that).
At best this would be useful for being absolutely sure that some encryption keys were sent successfully without being intercepted by anyone else.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is one of the few instances where it's appropriate to post Sabbine, and she isn't spreading misinformation. I used to enjoy watching her videos. On topics of physics she's good. But holy hell some of the shit takes she's had deviating from the areas she's educated in.

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

Good ol Dunning-Kruger effect

[–] CluckN@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is it working?

Yes and no.

[–] dan1101@lemm.ee 14 points 2 months ago

Don't observe it

[–] astro_ray@piefed.social 7 points 2 months ago

With my limited knowledge in the subject, after reading their paper, what I understand is, although they say it like it was a great success, their experiment, in its current state, will fail at scale. But, it is a progress compared to previous methods. Also, photons do not play nice.

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 5 points 2 months ago

or anticausal. oh man I need to doge 2seconds ago.

[–] mods_mum@lemmy.today 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Can someone explain why they still need fiber? I thought this was about someone finally succeeding in making practical use of entangled pairs.

[–] kata1yst@sh.itjust.works 24 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Entangled particles cannot transmit information between the pairs. That would violate information theory and likely causality as well.

Quantum networking is instead focused on using extremely robust encryption that can detect interception using entangled pairs of light particles being transmitted together in the fiber optics.

Edit:

To elaborate on this, let's talk about how entanglement works.

Let's say I have two identical bags. Into each of the bags I put one of two balls, one colored red, the other blue. I then mix these bags up like a shell game and hand you one.

Now you can travel anywhere in the universe, and when you open your bag, you know exactly what color you have and what color I have too. No information transmitted, only information inferred.

Now the quantum part is tricky. Basically when you do this experiment with quantum particles, for example generating two particles, one that must be spun up, the other that must be spin down, there's a lot of science that "proves" the particles spins are each entirely random, implying that somehow when you examine one you force BOTH particles to pick their opposite spins instantaneously across any distance.

Now there are two major explanations for how truly random gets 'picked' by the universe.

The first one is Bell's theorem, or 'spooky action at a distance', basically claiming that until you 'observe' the particles they both exist in an undetermined state, neither spin up or down, and when you look, the universe forces things to get corrected through some mechanism we don't understand. Scientists generally prefer this theory because the math is clean and beautiful, and randomness written into the most fundamental levels of the universe fits philosophical ideals nicely (more on that in a minute).

The primary alternative theory is much more mundane, but has huge implications. Basically this theory, called super determinism, claims there is no such thing as true random, and instead the universe has a set of hidden variables determined from the very beginning of the universe. This implies that time is an illusion and everything is fully deterministic across the entire universe. Scientists generally hate this theory because the math is much harder and uglier, and some interpret this to mean there is no free will.

[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 10 points 2 months ago

some interpret this to mean there is no free will.

Which is kinda stupid. Because even if my decisions come about through undetermined random quantum effects that is still a physical effect outside of my control and I still cannot really act of my own free will. Schopenhauer had already figured that out without the need for quantum physics. A person might do what they want but they cannot want what they want.

tldr: Free will is bullshit. Let's watch some TV.