<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>How many qubits are needed for quantum computational supremacy? · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1805.05224/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1805.05224/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>How many qubits are needed for quantum computational supremacy? — mentioned by The_rationalist</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21006925</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1805.05224:21006925</guid><pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2019 16:20:11 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;It should be at least more like 10000 according to this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.05224 But this is in an utopian world where we neglect quantum error correction and stability and the fact that quantum computers are mostly non programmable (there&amp;#x27;s not even one qubit logic gate..) TLDR quantum computing is going nowhere (excluding the low probability of a breakthrough in the field)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1805.05224/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
