I was hoping for more meat to his presentation, and was disappointed. I feel that he said absolutely nothing to help anyone in the audience understand what quantum computers actually DO or what sort of problems they'll help to solve. They'll absolutely not increase your FPS, as that's not what they're well-suited to do. What they are quite excellent at is taking a problem with many possible solutions and finding the correct (or best) one at an extremely high speed.

One example would be the Traveling Salesman problem. In brief, find the optimum route for traversing a number of points on a map. This is useful for things like scheduling package delivery routes, airline flights, etc. With a classic / current computer we write software that cleverly chugs through the possible solutions, throws out any that prove to be poor, and eventually gets to what appears to be the best or is at least a "good enough" solution. As the number of necessary points to be visited increases this problem scales in complexity quickly, so eventually a current computer would just choke on the problem and at best return an ok-ish solution in a reasonable period of time.

A quantum computer is a totally different beast. If it's "big" enough (IE, is comprised of a sufficient number of qubits), it takes the entire set of all possible solutions to the problem, and rather than iterate through them to find the best one, it checks them all simultaneously and immediately returns the optimum solution. It does this by using properties of quantum mechanics, and I think this is where the speaker was drawing his talk of parallel universes. If there are 3 qubits, they would exist as 000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, and 111 simultaneously. The software would then define what the best answer would look like, and the computer returns the answer.

You can hopefully see how this totally breaks encryption. With a current computer and a long enough encryption key, an encoded message would take the fastest machines a huge number of years to decipher. With a quantum computer you hand it a gibberish encrypted message, it loads all possible transformations of that message simultaneously, and it then returns the transformation which looks most like a coherent message.

I'm excited to see what these machines can do for us, but they're going to necessitate some significant structural changes in how we handle sensitive data.

Looks like a pretty wide carriage way but facing up to traversing lights (never mind power lines etc) at speed would be freaky. +1 kudos to the pilot.

Can already see this not working too well...the mars rovers wheels are already in SERIOUS trouble, just from traversing soft sand on mars.

You really think those thin sidewalls on that cube would last being thrown around like that, for very long?

More like "Rabbit traverses avalanche, like a boss..."

I still feel very comfortable thinking of him as a moron and anyone else who traverses said white line.

That makes the gate even more surpufluos. Most cattle grids dont have fences or gates over them, and they keep the cattle inside and the roads gate-free. This gate is cool from an engineering standpoint, but I dont know what sort of animal its supposed to keep in(or out). an animal that would be light and agile and fearless enough to step on the grid without opening it(like a cat) could easily also traverse that fence. Animals heavy enough to open the gate wouldnt cross a gateless grid either..

People don't understand the difference between YIELD and MERGE.

ON a Yield, the traversing traffic must MAKE room.
ON a MERGE, the incoming lane must FIND room.

If you don't know the difference, stay the !#@$ out of MY way.

That's why I don't recommend it to anyone who isn't paranoid about traffic. Even in my car, I check for red-light runners before going through any intersection (from a stop, anyway). I once heard a story about some lady getting ticketed in such a collision, when she was the one with the green light. Maybe the story is untrue, but everyone is responsible for safe traversal of an intersection. Just because you "had the right of way" doesn't mean you couldn't have prevented a collision with a little extra care.

I think more likely, given the experience of life on Earth, the number of intelligences with the power to either traverse or communicate across interstellar distances is probably stupidly, stupidly small -- to the point that for all intents and purposes, we're pretty much it.

Between the discovery that we're not alone and the discovery that we are alone, I feel the second would be a much more profound driver of human accomplishment than the first.

I'm going to assume that this is the Lorentz force, because it's the principle that involves magnetic and electric fields. But there are setups that can use subtleties of magnetic and electric fields, it can be very complicated. Any physicist rather than astronomer might be able to explain this better... or spot subtleties.

If you notice, it only starts moving once the back magnet has touched the wire. Which i think means that the wire is used to carry the current from the battery, with the magnets providing the magnetic field for the Lorentz force to drive the train. Effectively the force is felt by the electrons travelling in the wire (F = q(E + v x B), x being vector product, cross product), but there is an equal and opposite force to be felt by the 'train'; so it travels along. If you watch, it does look like the wire is responding - i'm pretty sure the small track would have shot off to the right if he hadn't held it, and it moves as the train approaches in the longer track.

So, circuit is set up by the the wire contacting between battery terminals, current flows in a circular fashion (mostly, assuming adjacent loops don't short). Magnetic field will emanate out from the battery on average radially, i assume (this is a simplification but a reasonably safe one), so the resulting cross product - and therefore direction of the force - acts along the remaining perpendicular direction to those, ie. straight up or down the loop depending on which terminal is leading.

If you want to see how that works, you can use the right hand rule. First finger is the direction of the electron's velocity (which is traversing loops so constantly changing in a circular manner), middle finger the direction of magnetic field which always comes out radially from the middle of the coil or track, thumb F the resultant force always points along the loop - make your first finger point in all directions of a circle, keep your middle finger pointing radially out relative to your first finger, and you will notice your thumb always points the same way, no matter how v changes circularly.

It is reasonable to assume that other factors are involved, probably a current is induced into the coil as the battery moves - the battery carries a magnetic field cos of the magnets, so we then have a moving/changing magnetic field in the presence of a wire; it should induce a current which would create a magnetic field in opposition to the field of the magnets.. and so on. But i think the Lorentz force is what provides most of the motion.

A pretty neat historic video, and a nice illumination on a general trend!

However, I find his argument against the continuation of the trend for otherwise ordinary people to aspire to greatness to be a bit shallow. The idea that youngness and instant gratification (which is a recipe for impatience?) leads to the loss of ability of people to go through the 'difficult years' is a bit disconnected. It could be argued the exact opposite way; since all of the information we need to acquire inspiration for all great ideas can be googled in a few seconds instead of gathered from libraries across the state in a matter of days, the willingness of people to traverse the difficult years may be better than ever. I know that when I need to quickly get familiarized with a completely new and dauntingly technical subject, google and wikipedia really help a lot, and I would feel quite intimidated if I needed to go about it the old fashioned way.

Actually, this is true, but it's also only one of the recall items that GM has issued Recalls for this year.

"It recalled 8,208 of its 2014 cars on May 7, for example, because they might have rear brakes on the front wheels."

"GM says it has informed regulators about two more recalls imminent but not yet announced. The latest batch includes safety belt, air bag, transmission and electrical issues in a range of midsize sedans, full-size crossovers and SUVs, and pickups."


GM's U.S. recalls this year

Below are General Motors' recall of vehicles in the U.S. since Jan. 1

Date, no. of U.S. vehicles, models affected, recall defect

- Jan. 13: 324,970 of the 2014 Chevrolet Silverado and 2014 GMC Sierra for overheated exhaust parts

- Feb. 7 and 25: 1,367,146 of the 2005-07 Chevrolet Cobalt, 2006-07 Chevrolet HHR, 2005-07 Pontiac G5, 2006-07 Pontiac Solstice, 2003-07 Saturn ION, 2007 Saturn Sky, 2007 Opel GT, 2007 Daewoo G2X for ignition switch

- Feb 20: 355 of the 2014 Buick Enclave, LaCrosse, Regal and Verano; 2014 Chevrolet Cruze, Impala, Malibu and Travers; 2014 GMC Acadia for transmission shift cable adjuster

- March 17: 63,903 of the 2013-14 Cadillac XTS for brake vacuum booster

- March 17: 303,013 of the 2009 Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana for airbag

- March 17: 1,178,407 of the 2008-13 Buick Enclave, 2008-13 Chevrolet Traverse, 2008-13 GMC Acadia, 2008-10 Saturn Outlook for airbag

- March 17: 656 of the Cadillac ELR for electronic brake control

- March 28: 823,788 of the 2008-11 Chevrolet HHR, 2008-10 Chevrolet Cobalt, 2008-10 Pontiac G5, 2008-10 Pontiac Solstice, 2008-10 Saturn Sky, 2008-10 Opel GT, 2008-09 Daewoo G2X for ignition switch

- March 28: 174,046 of the 2013-14 Chevrolet Cruze for front axle shaft

- March 28: 489, 936 of the 2014 Chevrolet Silverado, 2014 GMC Sierra, 2015 Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban, 2014 GMC Yukon and Yukon XL for oil cooler fitting.

- March 31: 1,340,447 of the 2004-06 Chevrolet Malibu and Malibu Maxx, 2004-06 Pontiac G6, 2004-07 Saturn Ion, 2008-09 Chevrolet Malibu, 2008-09 Pontiac G6, 2008-09 Saturn Aura, 2010 Cobalt, 2009-10 Chevrolet HHR for electric power steering

- April 9: 2,191,014 of the 2005-10 Chevrolet Cobalt, 2006-11 Chevrolet HHR, 2007-10 Pontiac G5, 2006-10 Pontiac Solstice, 2003-07 Saturn ION, 2007-10 Saturn Sky for ignition key cylinder

- April 24: 50,571 of the 2013 Cadillac SRX for acceleration lag

- April 19: 23,249 of the 2009-10 Pontiac Vibe (built by Toyota) for air bags

- April 24: 51 of the 2015 Chevrolet Silverado HD and 2014 GMC Sierra HD for diesel transfer pump

- April 29: 51,640 of the 2014 Chevrolet Traverse, 2014 GMC Acadia and 2014 Buick Enclave for inaccurate fuel gauge

- April 29: 56,214 of the 2007-08 Saturn Aura for shift cable

- May 7: 8,208 of the 2014 Chevrolet Malibu and 2104 Buick Lacrosse for brake rotors

- May 14: 111,889 of the 2005-07 Corvette for headlight low beams

- May 14: 19,225 of the 2014 Cadillac CTS for windshield wipers

- May 14: 140,067 of the 2014 Malibu for brake boost

- May 14: 2,440,524 of the 2004-12 Chevrolet Malibu, 2004-07 Malibu Maxx, 2005-10 Pontiac G6 and 2007-10 Saturn Aura for brake lamps

- May 14: 477 of the 2014 Chevrolet Silverado and 2015 Chevrolet Tahoe for steering tie-rod

- May 16: 1,402 of the 2015 Cadillac Escalade for passenger air bag

- May 19: 1,339,355 of the 2009-10 Saturn Outlook, 2009-14 Chevrolet Traverse, 2009-14 GMC Acadia and 2009-14 Buick Enclave for front seat belts

- May 19: 58 of the 2015 Chevrolet Silverado HD and 2015 GMC Sierra HD for loose fuse block

- May 19: 1,075,102 of the 2004-08 Chevrolet Malibu and 2005-08 Pontiac G6 for shift cable (expands April 29 Saturn Aura recall)

Total 18,666,842
( http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/05/20/gm-recalls-fine-goverment/9329481/ )

Words you don't want in a row: "Massive flight... coming up to this really icy bumpy traverse"

I'm not a big fan of the Olympics, but that looks like a course fit to separate the good from the great.

I'll give the guy all the credit for a suberb run (and balls of steel) but it's just not the same thing as driving it on gravel in a group B car.

Even if you ignore the sun in the eyes, stick gear changes and the way Vatanen had to use the clutch in the corners because the engine just had too much power, the sheer difficulty of traversing a low friction surface like gravel puts his time in a league of it's own.

Watch the two videos and you see the complete technical difference, Loeb goes in to low gear through the corners, doesn't drift at all (even drops in to first at points), and uses the cars acceleration combined with tarmac traction to get back up to speed. He even hits 6th gear quite a few times in the run. His control of the wheel is very smooth and measured.

Now watch Vatanen. Most of the corners, he's probably riding 2nd or 3rd and instead of breaking, is using the crazy horsepower of the engine to keep him going round the corner. He doesn't reach the same sort of top speeds of course because he's constantly fighting the loss of traction even in a straight line. His wheel control is excellent, but you can observe how he is constantly fighting to maintain his place on the road.

I suspect Loeb probably could better Vatanen's time with the same car and similar conditions, but we'll never know.