Does not show the code obviously, does not explain what it's supposed to do, nor the fix or how it improves what...
Just comments about how wonderful this guy is.
It doesn't even say what was solved or any details about anything. Basically just click-bait. Nobody is going to care to read a paper on it unless they're interested in quantum computing.
Apparently it sped up a chip, or something. If the author of the article didn't even care to look, then it's probably not worth anyone else's time either.
I'll admit that I'm too stupid to understand why at least a link to the paper wasn't provided in the general news article. Perhaps you can explain it to me? Use small words please, me being stupid and all.
It's written by a journalist. Journalists annoyingly bring in human interest and take out factual details because 95% of the audience can relate to the former but only 10% to the latter.
disclaimer: percentages made up by a boy who once found a coin with the image of his grandfather in the yard and proceeded to dig a morsel at a time to find more, using a spoon that he... but I digress.
This is why scientists get training in communication so they can basically write articles for journalists. Even the best science journalists, often ex-scientists, aren't experts in quantum computing, astrophysics and molecular biology, and may be the only science journalist on the Nether Wallop Daily Blah.
WHY IS IT AN ARTICLE IS IF LACKS EXACTLY WHAT IT SUPPOSEDLY IS ABOUT??
WHY MUST I LOOK UP SOMETHING IF *YOU* ARE CURRENTLY SUPPOSEDLY TELLING ME ABOUT IT?
You want to tell me, then tell me! Or just don't write an empty article and shut the fuck up.
--- filter error: don't use so many caps. it's like yelling.... yeah, no shit?... filter error: don't use so many caps. it's like yelling.... yeah, no shit?...
Useless Article (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Useless Article (Score:1)
"I am too lazy to find the paper, and too stupid to not understand why it's not provided in a general news article."
Re:Useless Article (Score:4, Informative)
It doesn't even say what was solved or any details about anything. Basically just click-bait. Nobody is going to care to read a paper on it unless they're interested in quantum computing.
Apparently it sped up a chip, or something. If the author of the article didn't even care to look, then it's probably not worth anyone else's time either.
You will probably care (Score:2)
But move along, nothing to see here.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll admit that I'm too stupid to understand why at least a link to the paper wasn't provided in the general news article. Perhaps you can explain it to me? Use small words please, me being stupid and all.
Hopefully it isn't "pay for it".
Re: Useless Article (Score:2)
It's written by a journalist. Journalists annoyingly bring in human interest and take out factual details because 95% of the audience can relate to the former but only 10% to the latter.
disclaimer: percentages made up by a boy who once found a coin with the image of his grandfather in the yard and proceeded to dig a morsel at a time to find more, using a spoon that he... but I digress.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
A TECH SITE with non-retarded editors would link it in the first place.
https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. Sad I had to scroll halfway down through the comments before someone posted it :P
Re: (Score:2)
WHY IS IT AN ARTICLE IS IF LACKS EXACTLY WHAT IT SUPPOSEDLY IS ABOUT??
WHY MUST I LOOK UP SOMETHING IF *YOU* ARE CURRENTLY SUPPOSEDLY TELLING ME ABOUT IT?
You want to tell me, then tell me! Or just don't write an empty article and shut the fuck up.
--- ... yeah, no shit? ... filter error: don't use so many caps. it's like yelling. ... yeah, no shit? ...
filter error: don't use so many caps. it's like yelling.
Re: (Score:0)