Really? Can you offer a comparative American/Russian timeline of computer telecommunication innovations, or are you just assuming? Be sure to focus on pre '68 era, before American socialism was applied in large part (public funding/monopoly busting).

And for some unknown to you reason China is beating the ever loving pants off America lately....so what's your point? Certainly not that Capitalism always beats socialism, I hope you aren't that deluded. Both have strengths and weaknesses, both ebb and flow. Neither are the sole determining factor for inventiveness, neither has a monopoly on invention.

Russia beat America into space even with their near poverty level economy at the time, and despite the fact that their scientists definitely didn't personally profit from their myriad of inventions required to make it happen.
I'm not arguing which is better, that's like arguing over which color is better....better in what way? I'm arguing against your contention that ONLY personal profit drives invention or innovation. That's clearly a mistaken assumption imo.

In reality, it wasn't spare time tinkering at all, it was serious academics doing full time paid research funded by the government. ARPANET, while funded by the defense department, was designed by and connected college researchers, the first transmissions were between UCLA and Stanford in 69, not the military. This was the first networking, the infant internet.
The military system in the 60's was a point to point tonal encryption system that ran on proprietary bell telephone systems with dedicated direct phone lines until the FCC forced Bell to give up it's capitalistic monopoly in 68, allowing for advancements in both the public and eventually private sector that led to the infant internet instead of just individual "computers" (and I use the term lightly here) directly communicating. Remember, back then, almost into the 90's, you needed to know the direct phone number of the other computer to connect (think "War Games"), there was no publicly accessible network.
The first retail internet transaction wasn't until 94.

Also imo, it was weird individuals tinkering in their spare time that made home computing anything more than very expensive word processors/calculators. We've had PCs since the 70's in my home, I remember what they could do then....I'm one of those weird individuals.

Long and short, your 5 different capitalistic ways ALL stem from a purely socialist base and a socialist denial of private for profit monopolies, and most if not all of them were developed and implemented using at least some public funding. Without that, we would still be using bell telephone phone modems to direct dial each other. Without public/private cooperation, neither sector could advance like they have together.
Imo, it's not an either/or situation, it's both.

There was no ground movement to develop the internet that was somehow community or government funded and that ultimately made it popular and useful.

In reality there was a 60s military communications project that got traction (after decades of basically spare-time tinkering development by weird individuals funded by socialism) when capitalism made home computers possible. Then it skyrocketed because profits could be made.

Socialism was an expensive land telephone line. Capitalism is five different ways I could get connected tomorrow at speed if I decide today. I just realized I stopped thinking about how fast my internet connection is years ago.

Ive now been slightly obsessively reading and discussing quantum computers with friends (including a couple clever and informed ones) for two weeks and the theoretical possibility of one day feeding the traveling salesman to a QC is about the biggest real excitement that awaits us in the medium term (decades). Hence my Sim City comment. Seriously there is very little information and a lot of exaggeration in this video. I know great things are expected from QC I just dont believe 98% of whats in the vid has anything to do with anything.

So, take a short cherry picked list of American inventions created largely with public funding, then claim only American capitalism could have produced them? Uhhhhh......

The inventors of the internet were NOT able to profit directly from their own ideas, they were military and publicly funded schools working in conjunction to create a publicly owned private data sharing network. Later, when this publicly funded network was opened to the public, private companies used it for private profit, and (often) slowed progress and stymied advancements in the process.
It's simply wrong to claim government funded advancements are due to capitalism simply because the taxes came from a capitalist country. Wow.

What about 5G...China is ahead of any capitalist country on that, and many other computing advancements. Those technicians don't see a scintilla of profit from their inventions, ideas, and often businesses (granted, some are allowed to make billions, but only a certain few that are government affiliated oligarchs, and it can be stripped from them the instant they don't tow the party line).

...Maybe? It would absolutely annihilate at something like chess, or Go. I have a hard time imaging a good use case for having it actually run a video game, but I'm guessing few people working on early traditional computers could've envisioned any of the delightful diversions we now take as a given. Probably when I'm 80 kids will be playing quantum Minecraft in a layered omniverse of worlds, where removing a block in one world has consequences in nearby dimensions, with chaos theory realistically modeled and incorporated.

Some complex tasks a QC would absolutely rock at however. Feed it a long list of employees, hours of availability, and coverage requirements, and it should spit out a 100% optimum schedule immediately. Air traffic controllers (particularly at large hub airports) would likely find it helpful in coordinating flight plans. Logistics for manufacturing, shipping, etc. The downside is that encryption will likely be utterly fucked for a while, as a quantum computer with a sufficient number of qubits could try all possible options at once. So it'll be interesting, but we're still 10+ years from any sort of commercial products, and they'll be like the computers of the 60s: huge and expensive, big iron for custom purposes. Or at least that's my semi-informed guess, I ain't no technoprophet.

Someone who really wants to get involved in bleeding-edge tech would do well to dive into this field. Writing the algorithms needed to run a task on a QC requires a completely different mindset than programming a traditional computer. I don't think people with years of experience with current programming methodologies would adapt well. At best they'd be nearly starting from scratch, at worst they'd have to work to un-learn what they already know.

It'll be useful eventually, but I wouldn't bank on soon. My final project in college was related to quantum computing, which at the time (18 years ago) was effectively entirely theoretical. I've enjoyed seeing the steady, albeit slow, progress.

The areas where quantum computing will really shine are problems which involve a huge number of possible answers, but only one best or correct one. The traveling salesman problem is a classic of computer science, as you can scale it up in complexity to the point where any traditional computer will eventually choke on the sheer number of permutations to test. Great way to demonstrate the need for clever solutions and well-written algorithms vs brute force approaches. An adequately sophisticated quantum computer, however, will theoretically be able to solve the traveling salesman problem nearly instantly, regardless of the level of complexity / number of nodes to navigate. Because it just tests all possible answers simultaneously.

Wow. Awesome.
*doublepromote *quality science.....a potentially exponential computing advancement, great until it becomes sentient and murderous.

Next, can they tackle Entangled Quantum Particle computing and communication. If we go to Mars, it would be great to have instantaneous communication instead of a varying delay each way.

You had me at ...
"geometry, music, mathematics, astronomy ...the writing of music is a hybrid activity between something very technical and rule based and computational and also pure chance and randomness and intuition and those things colliding allow us to evoke emotions…"

The cylinders @ 0.51 looks like code or some "3rd kind" of computer binary code stuff. Maybe all the names of those who worked on it. Or not.

https://ibb.co/DKHmT43

For me this works really well on my phone and not at all on my computer.

There is actually a bowling robot that bowls strikes all the time, but it doesn't look much like this, and they have it surrounded in plexiglass panels for SAFETY (something you'd need even more if that computer animation thing were real).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUKUXGrY91w

For me, I read about it like a decade ago online since I am into computers, security, privacy, etc. with other *geeks!

Lost me when they claim they're prosecuting him for journalism...they're prosecuting him for helping Manning hack government computers and steal state secrets that he then posted. He's guilty of the same crimes Manning was convicted of.

They "FEEL" like he involved himself in the election with Russian involvement!? No, Joe, he did involve himself. He clearly, undeniably tried to help Trump in numerous ways, was in direct contact with the campaign constantly, and did all he could to hurt Clinton.

The charges are not trumped up, and not for reporting anything. They are for his verified involvement in the theft of state secrets, not the election, not Russia, not reporting, but for helping Manning hack secure servers by telling him how to do it.

Fail, Joe.
I won't tag this as lies....but they're lying, and they know it.

I could do this as long as I have computers and Internet.