Thread regarding IBM layoffs

More Quantum Hype or just another Dead Cat Bounce from Alvind ?

Mediocre demo trying to hype something that Microsoft and Google are way ahead already:

Behind IBM’s Boldest AI Bet: The Quantum Test Lab

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/behind-ibm-s-boldest-ai-bet-the-quantum-test-lab/vi-AA1HHfl4?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W099&cvid=b3189b71b32f4b6d98113c31a2874fdc&ei=25

Lots of claims but it is apparent that IBM has become irrelevant in the tech world under Alvind and the Pipmunks. The stock price just keeps on dropping every day and that says something for the IBM leadership. Failing, failing, failing ......and no return back to the halcyon days of Yorktown Research. Going the same way as Somers and Southbury. It's all about big egos and no substance behind the hype.

by Anonymous
| 1161 views | | 4 replies (last August 17) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1k272zh6x
Comment! It's anonymous!

4 replies (most recent on top)

How can IBM be a leader in any technology when their capacity for funding is much less than Microsoft, Google, AWS.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ek+1k272zh6x

The awful truth about the field right now is that the big players (NVidia, Microsoft, Google, Apple) aren't all that far ahead of IBM. Both AI and Quantum are in their infancy right now, and anybody could get ahead very quickly with the right discoveries and the right offerings for the market.

But let's talk about IBM. IBM's basic problem is that its ownership (the stockholders) and its management have given up. They don't believe in taking risks, and so they pursue half-hearted measures that are guaranteed to fail against those who are perceived as "leaders".

Does Google, Microsoft or NVidia have anything REALLY compelling? Does OpenAI? At the moment, the honest answer would be "not yet". But what they DO have is the willingness to take a chance. The willingness to lose an investment, in the pursuit of something better...something more than what they have.

IBM doesn't have this, and hasn't had it for a long time. They build legacy products for legacy customers in legacy markets. Anything that doesn't fit the paradigm is sold off for cash, because cash is the only thing the big players in the company are really interested in. Going to cash is a zero risk strategy, and the big players are all about zero risk.

The whole world knows it. It's not easy to recognize a winner, but it's real easy to recognize a loser.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @j7+1k272zh6x

When I was at IBM (less than 10 years ago), if you put it on a PowerPoint it became truth. That's how Watson was embedded in every team's doohickey. I'd think the same winning strategy could be used for QC.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @fk+1k272zh6x

There are no actual quantum computers in existence anywhere, so by definition any demo of one is just a parlor trick. Shooting lasers at trapped ions or putting electric charges into superconductors are cool science experiments but they're not "computers" in any commonly accepted sense of the term. Jensen was right when he said QC is at least 20-30 years away, but boy did that pi-s off the CEOs depending on the hype so they made him change his tune.

by Anonymous
| | Reply
Post ID: @en+1k272zh6x

Post a reply

: