I mean I get your argument but it feels like one should adjust for wage growth instead. One labor unit of value converts to a shittier backpack.

The other side of that coin is that someone whose units of labor demand less value can still get into the market.

see terry pratchett's boots theory of economic fairness. They'll get into the market with something that costs more long term...

for making research grade devices you barely need a cleanroom

You just need unitarity.

Unitarity means that information (about quantum states) is not lost, despite it appearing otherwise after a measurement. The Many-Worlds interpretation seems to be the simplest way to explain where this information has gone.

There are NO alternatives. There's nothing else that stays liquid at 4 K and absolutely nothing else comes close.

> There are NO alternatives.

We use a lot in our MR scanners.

The tech is changing and magnets are using far far less.

Super-conduction at higher temperatures has made progress too.

So while you are right that nothing else stays liquid at those temps, we won’t be needing nearly as much helium in radiology in the next few years.

The new generation use something like 700ml of helium, where the standard was hundreds of litres. https://magneticsmag.com/siemens-healthineers-gets-fda-clear...

> So while you are right that nothing else stays liquid at those temps, we won’t be needing nearly as much helium in radiology in the next few years.

How many loans for MRI machines that require helium haven't been paid back yet?

I know of a few.

They use a lot when installed, but rarely need top-ups.

They are shipped full of helium and chilled, but aren’t ramped up (so aren’t superconducting magnets until after commissioning).

The article itself spells out several alternatives to buying continuous amounts of Helium: high temperature semiconductors and zero boil-off systems that don't require a continual supply.

All these "we're going to run out" stories pretend that engineering cannot adapt to changing cost structures, which is just total nonsense.

Sure, there is nothing that can be directly substituted for how we use Helium today, but clearly we're using Helium inefficiently today and the answer is that once markets force us to change, we will find more efficient ways.

The article also points out several cases where this isn't possible

2d materials are so awful to work with but keep yielding these stunningly beautiful results so physicists must persist.

Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will

The power of quantum computing is constructing the solution to a problem out of an interference pattern. Classical probabilities don’t interfere, but quantum probabilities do. Loosely, quantum probabilities can be constructed to cancel, since their amplitudes can be negative.

Shor’s algorithm works on the quantum Fourier transform. The quantum Fourier transform works because you can pick a frequency out of a signal using a “test wave.” The test wave can select out the amplitude of interest because the information of the test wave constructively interferes, whereas every other frequency cancels. This is the interference effect that can only happen with complex/negative probability amplitudes.

The communication here is clear as mud. WHICH quantum systems? D-Wave? We know D-Wave is a joke!

The communication is in a superstate that has yet to collapse.

I have a 556 and 547 that I still use. They work fine. They slowed down a bit from the resistors drifting but whatever. Still very fun to use and they heat the workspace in the winter.

doom and gloom over the promise of free busses is a wild level of cynicism

Even my loved ones express skepticism, but upon deeper probing it's because they don't want to be let down.

Mamdani took a lot of heat for proposing something that isn't that feasible.

From the article someone linked to below:

Speaking on Oct. 30, MTA chairman and CEO Janno Lieber didn't seem amenable to the idea of making buses free for all riders.

"I want to make sure that people of limited income get priority in this discussion, that we're not just giving a ton of money to people who are riding the 104 on the Upper West Side, where I grew up, the bus on Broadway," Lieber said.

So the guy who might hold sway, hasn't been convinced yet its something he would be immediately on board with. The MTA is also still struggling financially, so losing even more revenue by giving away free bus trips isn't something the MTA will be cool with.

And then of course what nobody wants to talk about is how they would offset the losses in fair revenues? Why increases taxes of course:

Mamdani told CBS New New York back in September that he would pay for free buses, along with his other democratic socialist policies, in part, by increasing the corporate tax rate to 11.5% -- the same as New Jersey -- and instituting a flat 2% tax rate for individuals earning $1 million or more.

"My vision for making the most expensive city in the United States of America affordable is actually one that benefits all of us," he said.

What's your objection to the tax increase. I think people are talking about it plenty and it seems generally non-objectionable.

The other problem with free busses is that in NYC people of all income brackets use public transit. That’s rare amongst cities. New Yorkers know that the subway is way faster than a chauffeured SUV for most trips and so you’ll see millionaires riding alongside those of far less means. Folks of all means also use the busses.

The MTA needs money and so making busses free for everyone is silly when many riders can certainly afford to pay. Various means tested approaches are in place and are the sort of thing that generally gets broader support.

The whole “tax the rich” line makes for good stump speeches but doesn’t work in practice. The rich have good accountants that let people avoid most of these ideas.