zlacker

>>qqqqqu+(OP)
Quantum Computers. Not like I'm five, but like I'm a software engineer who has a pretty decent understanding of how a classical turing machine works. I can't tell you how many times I've heard someone say "qubits are like bits except they don't have to be just 1 or 0" without providing any coherent explanation of how that's useful. I've also heard that they can try every possible solution to a problem. What I don't understand is how a programmer is supposed to determine the correct solution when their computer is out in some crazy multiverse. I guess what I want is some pseudo code for quantum software.

>>arkanc+ps
I think because it has less applications for traditional "software" and more applications for efficiency of embedded systems.

But it could have some bleeding edge new applications from the TCP/IP space for urgent point, new methods for cryptography, or speeding up algorithms for searching. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>aiisju+AU
Im not an expert on quantum computers but I'm not aware of any applications in the embedded space.

Generally quantum computers are good for three things

* factoring numbers (and other highly related order-finding problems). RIP RSA, but not that applicable outside of crypto.

* unstructured search (brute forcing a problem in only O(sqrt(n)) gueses instead of an average of n/2 gueses). Certainly useful...but its not a big enough speedup to be earth shattering.

* simulating various quantum systems (so scientists can do experiments easier). Probably by far the most useful/practical application in the near/medium term.

There's not a whole lot else they are good for (that we know of, yet)