On Tuesday 08 March 2016 18:41:32 Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 07:24:37PM +0100, Hubert Kario wrote: > > No, I said that we have no reason to believe that quantum computers > > won't follow exponential increase in number of qbits they can > > handle, > > with the highest increase not exceeding doubling every year, but > > more > > likely doubling every two years (as every other technological > > development did till now). > > There's reason to be skeptical of such analogies. Moore's law was > neither a theorem nor a law of nature. It was an observation about > progress in feature-size shrink of silicon transistors. It is far > from clear that evolution of silicon fabrication is a relevant model.
That's why I'm not saying that it will be exactly like Moore's law. My point is, that processes which have super-exponential growth are the exception, not the rule (if they exist at all). And you would be hard pressed to find any process in history that experienced exponential growth over a long time span and be at the same time vastly faster than the Moore's law. -- Regards, Hubert Kario Senior Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
