There's definitely a tension. When employers can treat employees as disposable, there is more firing and thus (sometimes) more hiring.
However, unions increase the value of jobs. Union workers enjoy a better QOL and career stability, and they can actually build a life for themselves without worrying about being fired on a whimsy.
Luckily for something like game development, it is a growing industry with a low barrier to entry. Finding a job or starting a new company is very realistic-- until the next economic downturn, which will hurt union and non-union workers alike
Game dev is not a low barrier to entry industry. It is WAY easier to get a SDE job at a FAANG straight out of college than it is to get a job as a programmer at a big name studio, even with experience.
Maybe at a place like Valve, but that's a special case. a private company swimming in cash and having basically zero urgency to innovate or produce even derivative content.
Any of the Rockstar Games studios, Naughty Dog, SCE Santa Monica, Bungie, Epic Games, any of the main Activision-Blizzard (Ininity Ward, Treyarcht) or EA studios (Respawn), etc... basically any major studio rarely hire straight out of college.
This brings to mind the (truthfully) quite useless Minds.com social network. Twitter doesn't NEED a blockchain. Just look at Pleroma, Mastodon, or Gab to see p2p twitter replacements that are blockchain-free.
I'm disappointed that this article doesn't answer my only real question about quantum computers: What does a reasonable expectation look like? What is the range of potential performance gains?
I understand that this is the frontier and no one has any definite answers, but I hear everything from "trivial" improvements to "insta-crack AES-256" (thousands of trillion trillion trillion trillions times faster).
Does anyone have a well informed upper/lower bound estimate?
Quantum computers won't insta-crack AES. They only give a square-root speedup for symmetric crypto (so you can double the key length for equivalent security) with Grover's algorithm. It's public-key crypto algorithms based on prime factorization or the descrete log problem which will be broken by Shor's. However, running Shor's algorithm on production key sizes requires a huge quantum computer (with millions of qbits) and Scott Aaronson says he would be "astounded" if this was accomplished within the next decade.
Improvements are believed to be exponential when simulating physical quantum systems.
Quantum computing have be designed to solve a single problem : the simulation of quantum systems on a classical computer is very slow, lets build a quantum computer so that it will be fast.
It might seem like a fringe use case but it matters (a lot) to industrials and researchers in a wide variety of topics.
There's a lot of research at the "P = BQP?", "NP < BQP" kinda level, which is more like comparing big O notation runtimes.
I can tell you that Shor's algorithm for factoring takes O((log n)^2 (log log n)(log log log n)) (we can round that up to O((log n)^4) if you want)
to a the best known classical algorithm of
O(exp(1.9 * (log n)^(1/3) (log log n)^(2/3)))
But unless I tell you how fast each gate is, that tells you nothing about the constant time factors.
Also, all these quantum algorithms are constructed out of logical gates, but each logical gate might be built out of 10 physical gates, using some error correcting code.
Since you really need to know the physical characteristics of the particular architecture to know how much error correction you need, it's hard to even say how many gates something will use and how fast they are until we pick a particular architecture.
All we can really say is that given a big enough number, a quantum computer can factor it faster than a classic computer.
Getting an exponential speedup on simulating quantum-mechanical systems (protein folding/binding, material design) is the killer app of quantum computing. Nobody is funding quantum computers because they want to break public-key crypto; that's just a somewhat unfortunate (though interesting) side-effect bringing a bunch of costs with cryptographic R&D plus transitioning systems to post-quantum crypto.
Quantum computing is not expected to have large impacts on machine learning at this time after Ewin Tang's paper. There's an especially large amount of fluff in this area, though.
For most problems, no performance gains whatsoever. There's no expection for quantum computers to replace or improve general computing.
You can get immense speedups for a very particular set of problems, turning them from "can't possibly complete ever" to solvable; so it would be like an assistive device for these niche tasks, but it would be very important for them because otherwise they're not really practical to solve.
There's multiple bounds. The mounting evidence for BPP=BQP unfortunately falls aside P=BPP for evidence without proof. The weak interpretation is that BQP is vulnerable, and the strong interpretation is that BQP is broken. It's in the air, but for certain applications people can't afford to guess wrong. It's reasonable to remove it as a dependency in those fields.
Funny, I totally agreed with you until you said far-left instead of far-right! The op-ed section is consistently to the right of Bush-era conservatism, while the non-opinion section is a sort of Biden-centrism (i.e. right of center with left of center jargon) on most issues.
Moral relativism does not negate good/bad/right/wrong to the point that they are equivalent to "like" and "no like". That is a radical reduction, and removes the whole process of moral reasoning people use to live a moral life.
There are plenty of examples where the "right" thing to do is not pleasant, it is not socially acceptable, etc because it is instead congruent with a greater ethical structure. Please check out some moral philosophy before throwing the whole field into a bin.
Wild no one is addressing the floodgate of harassment this is opening. At least when one is harassed on another app they can just close it or delete your account and the harasser has little recourse.
Given their history, FB will likely just let this mess fester
When I search for gimp on ddg, the whole front page is filled with information about the GNU Image Manipulation Program. You can try for yourself here: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=GIMP&t=fpas&ia=about
If anything, if people actually cared about the disabled they should rejoice that this word is getting a new meaning. I for one didn't know the original meaning of that word until someone line you told me.
However, unions increase the value of jobs. Union workers enjoy a better QOL and career stability, and they can actually build a life for themselves without worrying about being fired on a whimsy.
Luckily for something like game development, it is a growing industry with a low barrier to entry. Finding a job or starting a new company is very realistic-- until the next economic downturn, which will hurt union and non-union workers alike