I don’t think you exactly understand the subject matter. A quantum computer is no more powerful, in terms of the problems that it can solve, than a regular computer.

There’s no current indication that our brain is a quantum computer. It does process a lot of information in parallel, but quite frankly, Watson can process far more information in parallel than a human brain can. Regardless, while a quantum computer may be faster for certain tasks, it has no computational ability that…

True, although the CS community isn’t focusing on artificial general intelligence. It’s wasting its time with machine learning. I mean, don’t get me wrong, it’s useful, but it’s just automated model fitting.

And with all the supercomputing power, it still cannot learn how to beat a professional go player.

Yes. I already said that. If you’re too stupid to understand what I wrote, that’s not my problem.

Sure. Let’s say my theory is if Justin Hopkirk would produce a hand with a form that follows function, and if I show that form followed function, as this paper does, then in the discussion it would be reasonable to say that the hand speaks to the existence of Justin Hopkirk. That would be the type of wording generally…

Guess what happens when the government starts subsidizing something? It goes up in price!

Science blog? I don’t see a science blog. I see Gizmodo: a once tech blog, turned progressive mouth piece.

Gotta love how it goes from “this is officially the hottest the Earth has ever been” to “this is the hottest the United States has been, since record keeping started 122 years ago.”

I already explained that. I’m not going to repeat myself.

> You freely admit the mistake they made - and that the inclusion of creator is an error...

> Good lord, you didn’t read the paper? It’s incredibly short. How do you feel comfortable commenting on it?

I already explained how (5) is not occurring in this case. It is not information unrelated to the study. Given that we don’t know, from the comments made by this Gizmodo author, how expansive the discussion section is, and quite frankly, I highly doubt you’ve taken the time to read the discussion, I’m going to call…

While Trump is in many ways part of the same social network, in terms of politics, he is anti establishment. It’s funny how so many are supporting the Republican establishment’s attempts to get rid of an anti-establishment candidate.

It didn’t say you couldn’t put your opinion in the discussion section. It said no new information. But an opinion or interpretation isn’t new information.

It actually comes down to the philosophical question of “self.”

I already pointed to a citation that says that opinion is okay in the discussion section. Move on.

I never claimed to have any published papers. As for degrees, I went for breadth over depth. I have an A.S. in Engineering from SUNY Orange, an A.S. in Computer Science from the same, a B.S. in Mathematics from SUNY New Paltz, along with a minor in anthropology.

Troll.

> Yes, you should if you expect me to know things you haven’t told me.