Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2020 October 17

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 17

The state of quantum computing as of October 2020?

It is a practical issue for me. I have a patented project that requires parallel computing with hard to mention number of channels. Thus I've been looking into quantum computing. My understanding, acquired from a cursory reading, is that Microsoft and IBM have been able to implement quantum computers with a small number of cubits (5). It seems Microsoft has made them available as part of their Azure cloud computing system, IBM has now their own cloud. I wonder if anyone with better knowledge will review this issue for me in a few paragraphs. Thank you, will appreciate it. - AboutFace 22 (talk) 17:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

You probably mean qubits not cubits. Nil Einne (talk) 02:27, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

So-called "quantum supremacy" (supremacy of quantum computing over "classical" computing) still has to be demonstrated convincingly; some sceptics think this moment may never arise.  --Lambiam 14:00, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia vs Wiktionary

The Wikimedia Foundation is arguably best known for Wikipedia which is and has been so popular. I wonder why Wiktionary didn't get as popular as Wikipedia. Interstellarity (talk) 20:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't know if it's possible to answer that, but my guess would be that defining words is a relatively straightforward thing compared to creating an entire encyclopedia. As a result, there are several viable options to Wiktionary out there, many with immediately recognizable names, like Merriam-Webster and Oxford English Dictionary. As far as online encyclopedias go, Wikipedia was and is way ahead of everyone else in terms of sheer volume alone. Matt Deres (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Today Wiktionary scores an Alexa rank of 694,^[1] which is pretty high; only two online-dictionary websites (cambridge.org and merriam-webster.com) have a higher rank. I guess that in general people are more often motivated to look up content info on a topic than lexical info on a word.  --Lambiam 13:54, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Matt Deres and Lambiam: Thank you for answering that. I wonder what people usually use as a dictionary when they want to look up a meaning of a word. Interstellarity (talk) 14:39, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I use www.onelook.com which accesses 18,955,870 words in 1061 dictionaries in one go. 84.209.119.241 (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2020 (UTC)