If this tech becomes widespread and cheap, what are the privacy implications of being able to sequence human DNA floating in the air in any public or private space? It feels like a classic 'can we/should we' problem.

Yes I knew that the claims have been retracted at least once but wasn't aware the discussion hd alaready appeared on Hacker news

What do you think of these claims, are they justified?

the article says you're more likely to be struck by lightning than for this gate to fail. The accuracy is a record-breaking 1-in-6.7 million operations.

But this is for a single-qubit gate. The article claims that the best two-qubit gates still have error rates of around 1-in-2000.

My question is: how much does this incredible single-qubit improvement change thinks, given that two-qubit gate errors are still a major problem? Does a breakthrough like this directly translate to improving two-qubit operations, or are they completely separate challenges?

Thanks!

You mean the featured image at the top of the article? Yes perhaps I should switch this. I didn't realise it was a problem.

I wrote this after getting frustrated with overly technical moon photography guides that assume you need expensive setups. The Canon 60D I mention is actually from 2010 and still produces sharp lunar shots.

What's been your experience with budget gear vs expensive setups for lunar photography?

My daughter is just getting into photography, and I was hoping your guide would share more of how to set the exposure for moon shots (which can be tricky and unintuitive for beginners). You might want to add some examples and what your settings were, as well as how you derived those settings.

It's really just trial and error. Set ISO to ~800, open the lens all the way, and fiddle with shutter speed to dial it in. Shutter speed is dependent on your zoom. If you're using a wide angle lens to catch the whole sky, you'll get ~10 sec of exposure before you start to see trails, it you're zoomed in, it may be as low as a half second. If you've dialed in the shutter speed to not get trails and the moon is too bright, lower the ISO. Just take a few test shots, dial it in, and then take 3-5 shots in succession and stack them in software.

I assume it depends on the amount of detail you're expecting to get.

Generally there are some broad categories:

1) tracked vs untracked mounts

2) shooting single frames vs shooting with high FPS and processing that into a resulting image.

It's all about error correction according to this news. They're betting on their new qLDPC error-correction codes being significantly more efficient than other approaches. Starling is planned to be built in 2029.

Is this a genuine paradigm shift, or just a very confident press release? It seems like a huge challenge and what about the comepetition from Google, Microsoft, and Quantinuum? I'm curious to hear what others here think.

What caught my eye about this article is the claim that they're achieving this with a more accessible setup. Using an algorithm to interpret and reconstruct a view based on light coming off a surface is quite brilliant I think! What are the applications for this do you think?

I've been sending newsletters for many years and in the last few years I have run two newsletters, one about self growth and inspiration and the other about astrophotography, for my company Astroimagery.

Now I am merging the topics of personal growth and space/ astronomy/ astrophotgraphy and I believe this is an idea which can work well. Do you think the cosmos and space can inspire self growth?