[froggychairs]

You can’t just throw AGI & Quantum together and have it mean anything. This is how a sci-fi show would explain away its technology

Combing the two doesn’t result in anything, besides the fact one is questionable if it can ever be realized (AGI) the other technology is extremely nascent and even physics wonder if there is a limit to the # of qbits (I’m more optimistic we’ll surpass that)

Even then the usefulness of quantum computers is called into question, and quantum inspired algorithms might net benefits without having to use a quantum computer for all inference ops

[klyrs]

Compare the size of today's training sets (unknown, I'm guessing PB given who's doing the work), models (TB for the good ones), versus the sizes of quantum computers (hundreds for gate model, a few thousand for adiabatic). We're looking at about 10 orders of magnitude (30 doublings) of progress that would need to be made, for quantum + ML to make any sense purely on dimensional analysis. If we're generous and give both sides a doubling every year, that's still 15 years out. My money is on classical computing owning this space for a long time.

[rich_sasha]

> You can’t just throw AGI & Quantum together and have it mean anything. This is how a sci-fi show would explain away its technology

Let's add Blockchain to it!