So it does computations...backwards

Shouldn't we be ready for the worst case scenario when the CIA controls a QC initially?



Shouldn't we be ready for the worst case scenario when the CIA needs to destroy the Bitcoin network?



Shouldn't we be ready for the worst best case scenario when Bitcoin is the most profitable target?



Shouldn't we be ready for the worst case scenario when a QC, that is able to break Bitcoin, appears in a few years?


--------------------------------------------

Well guys. I see that most of you just hope that Bitcoin won't be broken and there is no REAL protection against an attack, described in the original post.

--------------------------------------------

If Christian is right, then classical computing should be able to reproduce all the results so called "quantum computing" can achieve, although how much slower it would be to do it that way I don't know.

Furthermore, he even has an experiment one can do with macroscopic balls that, if he is right, should reproduce the "spooky" results on the macroscopic scale, thus demonstrating they are simply the topology of space, applicable at all scales, not some special weirdness down where things get small enough to introduce measurement uncertainties and such.

Unfortunately, as far as I have heard so far, no one has actually built the little plastic balls prescribed and run the actual experiment yet. Partly it seems everyone is so sure the universe is fundamentally spooky that no one can be arsed to actually check whether, in fact, it actually is.

Basically it is classical geometry of the n-sphere and/or classical topology of the n-sphere kind of stuff, best represented using Clifford algebras, but even those who purport to be familiar with Clifford algebras don't really seem to be particularly handy with them.

He presents it in other notations too but his detractors tend to keep shooting him down inventing weird glitches almost as oopsie as the one Bell started his theorem inequalities paper with that Christian is attempting to elucidate.

-MarkM-

Wouldnt stronger cryptography fix that?

ITT

If Qubits really can solve such problems and Christian is right maybe we can solve them on GPUs using Octonians.

-MarkM-

It still seems possible to me that quantum computing cannot really solve stuff the way it likes to claim.

This is because the claims are based on hypothetical spookiness. If really there is no spookiness, just plain old classical geometry of the 7-or-less sphere, once you have gone around the sphere a couple of times (a "double cover") maybe that is all you get, since going around more times still leaves you at a point of that same kind of sphere, and if the cover is only a double cover you only get two "different kinds" of "being there", you're either there with a twist or there without a twist, kind of thing, any larger number of twists unravels into one twist or none.

15 = 3 x 5 only involves the second prime, if you allow 1 to count as the zeroeth prime and 2 as the first prime. I'd like to see at least one more prime get solved otherwise maybe we can only solve for an untwisted case, say, 2 and a twisted case, say 3, and all the rest ahead might just unravel into one of those two cases, blowing all the wonderful quantum algorithms that all think quantum is some spooky thing not just simple geometry topology of n-spheres.

-MarkM-

Even if quantum does work, it isn't useful for hashing.

So all those SA goons with quantum computers in their mother's basement aren't going to be able to use them for hashing, thus to make money the mining way, they'll have to find other ways to put their toys to use. Such as by breaking all kinds of crypto all over the world, much of which might be even more profitable than hacking bitcoin txouts.

-MarkM-

The feds made Tor... so sure why not?