Bryan Chaffin

A funny thing happened on the way to the quantum computer: someone looked at the qubit. No, seriously. They looked at the qubit, and the data that had been stored there changed (and was thus lost) because [quantum computing]. TheNextWeb has a super cool piece on “time crystals,” a real thing that might be what quantum computing needs to be more reliable and not stored near absolute zero. If you’re interested in quantum computing, definitely check out this article. Here’s a snippet:

One of the strangest things about qubits is they act differently when observed. Without a certain amount of coherency, any data transmitted, created, or stored in a quantum system could simply vanish the moment we try to look at it. According to the research, the solution might be the generation of time crystals in quantum bits, so that they’ll “want” to be coherent.

Check out this great piece by Ben Zotto at Medium. It’s about how he used an original Mac to study Susan Kare’s Chicago, Geneva, New York, and San Francisco fonts. He was looking to better understand the magic that was Chicago, the original proportional font on the Mac. What he found, though were sheep. I don’t want to give it away because it’s a good read, but here’s a snippet:

So what was that thing about the hidden sheep, anyway, you ask? Well, the deconstruction of the original Mac font resources revealed something puzzling: in several of the fonts — though not all of them — there is an unexpected secret character hidden alongside all the normal ones.

AppleInsider‘s Stephen Silver took a trip to Consumer Reports to talk about that magazine’s approach to Apple. It’s a very good read, full of direct information about some of CR’s high-profile criticisms of Apple’s report. Here’s a snippet:

This all said, there are a few things we conclude from our visit to Consumer Reports. Having viewed their testing process and met with their team, we are confident that they do not harbor a purposeful anti-Apple agenda, nor is there any sort of conspiracy against Apple afoot behind the CR walls. Their complete testing and evaluation process is conducted with integrity and in good faith.

However, there may very well be something about CR’s analytical, numbers-driven process that clashes with the design-heavy Apple ethos, and makes their conclusions about Apple products different from those of more traditional reviewers. Even so, this hasn’t stopped them from recommending most of Apple’s lineup.

This, from John Gruber:

But everything about the way Google announced this — the curious details of the calls released so far, the fact that no one in the media has been allowed to see an actual call happen live — makes me suspect that for one or more reasons, the current state of Duplex is less than what Sundar Pichai implied on stage.

This was my thought from the get-go, and John Gruber does a great job of walking through the reasons. He also explains that he’s not bagging on Google’s ability to get to a true human-sounding AI that can book our appointments, and I agree with him there, too. There’s simply a lot that doesn’t add up about the Google Duplex demo and the information about that demo that’s come to light. It’s a good read I recommend.