×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Quantum Programming with Perl

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the more-than-one-universe-to-do-it dept.

Perl 189

moyix writes: "There's an article over at perl.com that describes how to use a perl module called Quantum::Entanglement. Using this module, one can simulate programming for a quantum computer. Developers looking to keep their skills current well into the next decade should check this out ;) Debian folks can grab libquantum-entanglement-perl and libquantum-superpositions-perl."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

189 comments

Shave and a haircut, qubits! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980708)

I always wondered how Larry Wall was seemingly in 10 different newsgroups at one time. I guess he's been using quantum physics all along...

Re:Shave and a haircut, qubits! (-1)

Fucky the troll (528068) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980774)

Yeah!!! and you suck so much cock it's unbelievable! I mean, there are cocksuckers, and then there's YOU. You could out-do Taco in cocksucking ability! There's not enough cock in the world to satiate your veracious cock-appetite. Cock is your kingdom, and the land you shall suck. You love the cock. If power were measured in cocksuckness, you'd be God. You could easily get the gold in the cock-suck olympics. Way to suck cock, man! The sucking-challenge of the cock is no match for your fellatio-prowess. No cock goes too deep for your throat, for you ARE the cock-suck KING! All cock-suck wannabees kneel before the RULER of the mouth-bound cock.

If there could only be one cock-sucker, you would be the one.

Re:Shave and a haircut, qubits! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980879)

heh.

Re:Shave and a haircut, qubits! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980888)

Very poorly done, sir. I refer you to this post [slashdot.org] .

Please try better in the future, mmmkay?

Frist Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980709)

FP woot!

thats nice but.. (1)

nihilist_1137 (536663) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980710)

how do we know if its real. Not many people have used quantum computers. The results could only be of non-quantum computers and we would never know, because we could never check.

Re:thats nice but.. (1)

mschachter (539568) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980719)

oh no, you mean i can't accurately reproduce quantum effects in perl?!? fuck man, i just don't believe in anything anymore.

Re:thats nice but.. (1, Offtopic)

Hwatzu (89518) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980737)

oh no, you mean i can't accurately reproduce quantum effects in
perl?!? fuck man, i just don't believe in anything anymore.

Well, of course you can't. That's what EMACS is for.

Re:thats nice but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980741)

Well, you could look at the code and do the math. Of course, since you can't even capitalize or puncuate correctly, expecting you to do math harder than addition is probably stretching it.

Re:thats nice but.. (2, Funny)

Dragnet (551689) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980769)

nihilist, in making this post; you didn't take into account the _very_ quantum principle of uncertainty ;). It could be real, it could be a hoax.

Re:thats nice but.. (0, Troll)

lkaos (187507) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980852)

ummm.... Let me make a slight correction. No one has ever used a quantum computer before. Quantum computers do not physically, or theoritically exist. Right now, it is just the buzz word of the moment.

I have yet to hear a single person explain how quantum computing is effective for doing anything pratical. IMHO, the Heisenberg Uncertainity Principle kind of makes quantum computing very not useful... The only real thing that can be done is based on statistics and quantum mechanics has this nice little habit of not following the traditional laws of statistics.

sorting, factoring (2, Informative)

rebelcool (247749) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980876)

algorithms have been worked out for sorting things and factoring primes using quantum techniques. However, only those 2 things have been settled at the moment (if you're getting a degree in philosophy, figuring out the quantum equivalent of boolean algebra is the way to make your mark on the world this century).

In any case, some researchers at IBM and other places have built small quantum cells than can make use of the above algorithms.

The problem with quantum computing is that many answers are revealed at once, most of which are incorrect. The algorithms need to be able to separate the wrong from the right. It's a task for bright logicians :)

Re:sorting, factoring (2)

norton_I (64015) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980929)

First, Grovers algorithm does searching unordered lists, not sorting. In fact, I believe it has been "proved" that sorting cannot be done faster than O(N * ln N) with a quantum computer, though take thost proofs with a grain of salt, there is always the possibility of attacking the assumptions.

Anyway, I want to point out that searching is actually a very general algorithm. Basically, any algorithm that is much faster to validate than construct a solution can be done that way. For instace, one way to factor is to iterate through all numbers less than sqrt(N), testing each one by dividing N by it. This takes O(sqrt(N)) time. Grover's algorithm speeds this up to O(sqrt(sqrt(N)), which is still exponential in the number of bits in N. Not that this is NOT Shor's algorithm, which can indeed factor numbers in polynomic time in the number of bits.

Re:sorting, factoring (2)

sconeu (64226) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981001)

algorithms have been worked out for sorting things and factoring primes using quantum techniques.

Hell, I have an O(1) algorithm for factoring primes!

Factors(p) = { 1, p }.

Now if you had a quantum algorithm for figuring prime factors (or even just a wheelbarrow), then you'd have something. Of course, such an algorithm *DOES* exist.

Re:sorting, factoring (2)

Uller-RM (65231) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981034)

Umm... boolean gates were created a long, long time ago in QC. Hell, I have a textbook that lists the matrices for them.

(For those uninitiated, under the Heisenberg interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, you can view any quantum computer's state as a vector space, in which operations are unitary matrices, and making an observation collapses the Schrodinger wave into an eigenvalue.)

For that matter, the same textbook stops using Dirac notation in the latter three quarters of the book, and uses the quantum equivalent of NOTs and XORs as a sort of wiring guide, denoting entanglement and superposition as necessary, to construct a ripple carry adder. This is shortly before it starts diving into Grover's and Shor's algorithms, among others.

Re:thats nice but.. (2, Informative)

jfonseca (203760) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980903)

http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article/0,,10 _943731,00.html

Scientists at IBM Corp.'s (NASDAQ:IBM) San Jose, Calif.-based Almaden Research Center this week rushed to report that they have performed a challenging quantum computer calculation, causing a billion-billion custom-designed molecules in a test tube to become a seven-qubit quantum computer.

With that breakthrough, they solved a simple version of the mathematical problem that is the crux of many of today's data-security cryptographic systems. According to Nabil Amer, manager and strategist of IBM Research's physics of information group, this was quite a feat.

"This result reinforces the growing realization that quantum computers may someday be able to solve problems that are so complex that even the most powerful supercomputers working for millions of years can't calculate the answers," said Amer.

Re:thats nice but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2981084)

"This result reinforces the growing realization that quantum computers may someday be able to solve problems that are so complex that even the most powerful supercomputers working for millions of years can't calculate the answers,"

Does this mean that i can now get Quake 3 framerates in the thousands?

Re:thats nice but.. (2)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980994)

You are spewing out of your ass here. Several real quantum computers DO exist. They are not useful for real calculations because they can only manipulate very small pieces of information (i.e. IBM's 7 qubit computer, MIT's 5 qubit computer). Factoring 2,3 or even 7 bit numbers is not interesting because it's easy to do with a classical computer.


But I have myself used a simple NMR quantum computer to execute Grover's search algorithm on a very small (4 element) search space when I was working at MIT. So there.

Re:thats nice but.. (4, Interesting)

Uller-RM (65231) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981050)

Try to learn at least one of the theories of quantum mechanics before you start throwing around principles, okay?

For one thing, QCs do exist - in fact, they demonstrated Peter Shor's 1994 factoring algorithm on a recently built 7-qubit box, factoring 15 into 3 and 7. You may say big deal, but it can factor ANY such integer in polynomial time. Usually the NSA is about 10 years ahead of the private sector, so I figure they've got at least 10 qubits by now. You should be worried - most public-key encryption methods rely on the intractibility of factoring.

Secondly, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle only states that you can't predict with 100% accuracy which eigenstate a qubit will collapse into upon measurement. You can, however, compute a probability amplitude (which ends up being a complex number) that it'll be a 0 and another probability that it will be a 1. And it is possible to perform operations upon one or more qubits without measuring it - the idea of creating an operation that doesn't collapse the state is the crux of Quantum Computing.

Unlike macroscopic physics, we don't know WHY things work on the quantum level the way they do. We've gotten relatively decent at predicting the end results though. So, we're just as confused as before... but we're capable of doing useful stuff with it. Don't knock it.

Re:thats nice but.. (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2981074)

in fact, they demonstrated Peter Shor's 1994 factoring algorithm on a recently built 7-qubit box, factoring 15 into 3 and 7.

Incoming message for Mr. Shor: Your algorithm doesn't work.

(ob. H2G2 ref.) Wait a minute ... *slaps forehead* Now I understand! 42! It all makes perfect sense now!

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980711)

fp
all your base are belong to us
-- kv

Lonely Nights (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980714)

Ahhh, lonely winter nights. Stuck at home, no friends, nothing to do. Right now, things are pretty grim for Francis Frisina.

Overcompensation (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980717)

Does anyone actually read the articles that are submitted? This story is six months old for crying old loud. While it's an improvement on the same story twice in one day, don't you think it's overcompensating a bit?

Entanglement? (5, Funny)

questionlp (58365) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980729)

Blockquoth the submission:
There's an article over at perl.com that describes how to use a perl module called Quantum::Entanglement
Why would I need a Perl module to help entangle Perl code even more? Isn't that part of the language ;-)

Re:Entanglement? (2, Funny)

Monkeyman334 (205694) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980831)

Original credit goes to uh ... Darkling:

print substr("the quick brown fox jumps over a lazy dog.",
$_,1)
for
(1,2,36,3,10,21,38,38,36,
41,9,16,21,7,8,25,36,17,5);

perl on a quantum computer (0, Troll)

Penrod Pooch (466103) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980733)

Given the power of a quantum computer, I'd expect, nay demand that it would DWIT. I don't wanna kludge along with perl or any other language.

Re:perl on a quantum computer (1)

justinstreufert (459931) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980746)

You've got it backwards.

This is a simulation of quantum computing, written in Perl.

(Say, have I just been trolled?)
Justin

Re:perl on a quantum computer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980783)

DWIT? As in joyce dewitt from Three's Company?

Re:perl on a quantum computer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980807)

Do What I Think

Re:perl on a quantum computer (-1)

Frank White (515786) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981011)

The PLP/PWP Theme Song
by Frank White
(sung to the tune of "Three's Company")

Come and look at our trolls
Come and look at our trolls
Slashdot org is our host
Slashdot org is our host
And you'll see an annoying comment called
Page Lengthening Post!

When I'm reading this site
When I'm reading this site
This upsets me the most
This upsets me the most
Cuz it makes all the pages hard to read
Page Widening Post!

You'll raise your threshold to zero and email Taco real soon!

Now let's all raise a toast
Now let's all raise a toast
Page Lengthening Post!

Wow (3, Interesting)

Cato the Elder (520133) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980735)

And to think people complained that garbage collection was inefficient! Actually, though, this is a huge step forward for Perl. Now, with just a few lines of code, you should be able to consume massive numbers of CPU cycles while still actually accomplishing something.

The module actually looks pretty cool. It says that some simplifying assumptions were made. Does anyone know if the simulation is reasonably accurate? That is, could you actually set up a quantum computer to behave exactly as the simulated one?

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980775)

Yes, this would behave *exactly* as a real quantum computer would, because the programmers implemented it as a real-time model of all the parts of a quantum computer, down to its composite sub-atomic particles, with absolutely no simplifications or assumptions, thus ensuring that the *virtual* quantum computer is an exact model of the real thing.

HAHAHHAHAHA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980973)

niiiice

Perl and Research (2, Insightful)

jfonseca (203760) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980738)

I just happened to notice that Perl is being used for so many innovative research fields.

First of all Perl seems to be an excellent language for Bioinformatics, and Dr. Lincoln Stein is a leading voice in this area. Recently O'Reilly has been giving great coverage in this area.

Nanotechnology seems to be another area where Perl is getting much attention.

I believe the platform and vendor independence, absolute openness, and superb data munging capabilities of it are the main reasons for Perl's adoption in such academic research.

But, although I am an aspiring Perl advocate [pm.org] ) and big Larry Wall fan myself, I wonder just how optimized these modules are for such intense low level work....

Re:Perl and Research (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980933)

Perl is a terrible language for Bioinformatics. Perl is an excellent language for the subset of Bioinformatics dealing with sequence analysis and searching. Particularly for being the interface between the user and the database. There's a lot of work going on not dealing with DNA that Perl is essentially useless for (it's mostly high-performance numerics so a lot of Fortran). Even for some sequence work, such as fragment assembly, Perl probably wouldn't be a good language because it's a high-dimension integer optimization problem that's been abstracted past the point of string manipulation.

The newsposter misinterpreted that article... (1, Insightful)

solistus (556078) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980756)

The article does not mention quantum computers, devices which do not exist and may not for quite a while. It simply applies the idea of multiple coexistant states, only one of which being observable at a time, to Perl. You'll note that it runs on a conventional computer; mathematically, a quantum computer would have infinite times the processing power of our current supercomputers, as it could use system resources infinite times at once, assuming each state existed seperately. This does not relate in any way to the hypothesized "Quantum Computers" of the not-so-near future; rather, it is an interesting new operation in Perl which could make anything using random numbers more powerful and easier to code. Imagine the possiblities for games... a very easy way to weight values without using tons of variables... yummy.

oh, by the way... (2, Informative)

solistus (556078) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980765)

I know the module is supposed to simulate programming a quantum computer, but it is not trying to simulate a quantum computer, there is a fundamental difference.
Also, I sincerely doubt that quantum computers will function this way, it is not the purpose of quantum computers to store multiple values for a single variable; it is to use physical resources more effectively

Mod this troll down before it's too late (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980870)

He obviously knows less about quantum computing than those who wrote the perl program.

> You'll note that it runs on a conventional computer

So what? Any quantum calculation can be simulated on classical hardware, just more slowly.

> a quantum computer would have infinite times the processing power of our current supercomputers

Make that "exponentially faster". Infinity is really really big in case you don't know.

> I know the module is supposed to simulate programming a quantum computer, but it is not trying to simulate a quantum computer

That's a gem.

it is not the purpose of quantum computers to store multiple values for a single variable; it is to use physical resources more effectively

Well that does it, you really don't know what you're talking about at all.

A little ahead of ourselves? (2, Insightful)

bagel2ooo (106312) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980761)

First off, I thought just about everything was workable in PERL but this is scary. :) Regardless, to the best of my knowledge there are no working quantum computers (tangible at least.) How can we be sure that code created with this will truely work the same way when it's eventually put onto an actual quantum computer? Even were this based on a tangible prototype I'd feel there'd still be cahnges that'd need to be made. *shrugs* Guess I'm just a jerk about toying with theory. :)

Re:A little ahead of ourselves? (1)

monk (1958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980971)

there are no working quantum computers (tangible at least.)

Actually there are several prototypes. The latest news is from IBM [ibm.com] although the original photo showed that the researchers were using Sun hardware. They've done a bit of photoshop (or GIMP?) magic since to remove the keyboard and logo on the monitor [ibm.com] .

Quantum::Superpositions (5, Interesting)

ilkahn (6642) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980762)

Anyone interested in doing any type of quantum computing should check out Dr. Damian Conway's [yetanother.org] excellent Quantum::Superpositions [cpan.org] . It is an extension to the perl language which adds the operators "any" and "all"... it's lets you do *incredible* things like:

use Quantum::Superpositions;

if ($x == any($a, $b, $c)) { ... }

while ($nextval < all(@thresholds)) { ... }

$max = any(@value) < all(@values);

A good place to go and discuss the in's and out's of the cooler aspects of the perl community is perlmonks.org [perlmonks.org] , check it out some time...

Re:Quantum::Superpositions (4, Interesting)

Flubu! (322749) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980901)

I heard Dr. Conway talk at the OReilly BioInformatics Conference in Tucson, AZ. He gave a talk about the Quantum::Superpositions module. It was hilarious. He started his talk with the premise that, if we could program on quantum computers in infinite multiple universes and constant time, this is how it should look like. As the talk progressed, the audience really started to get into it.

I have to say that Conway is a brilliant speaker and truly funny. When he announced after a 3 hour talk that what he just spoke about isn't just a nice concept in theory but an actual perl module (only in a single universe and in real, often exponential time), the crowd just lost it and ROTFLed :)

Re:Quantum::Superpositions (2, Interesting)

iradik (247593) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980921)

ugh, more syntax.

i have to admit though

any(@value) all(@values) is cool
why? because you dont have to write loops
for doing every different comparision. i bet
there are other benefits to the new syntax also.

but what does this have to do with quantum mechanics???

all of the operator overloading could
just be as easily called "set operators" or something.

then it wouldn't seem so spooky and mysterious,
and would rather seem like some practical
programming.

This is new? (4, Funny)

bluntmanspam (186509) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980763)

This still leaves us with plenty of ways to make Perl behave in a thoroughly unpredictable fashion.

For some of us, this is nothing new.

Re:This is new? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980895)

idiot

Quantum Perl.... (4, Funny)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980764)

Quantum Perl - "No longer will there be more than one way to do something, but rather there are an infinite number of ways to do everything!"

Real quantum computing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980770)

This seems to be a complex random number generator rather than a quantum computer simulator. Can someone tell me how to make a program to search an unsorted list in O(sqrt(n)) time with this module?

Re:Real quantum computing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980778)

Or even a good simulation of an O(sqrt(n)) search?

Re:Real quantum computing (2, Funny)

Lictor (535015) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980877)

I'm sure you can run Grover's algorithm in *simulated* O(sqrt(n)) time...

Did I mention that simulating a quantum system on a deterministic machine will require EXPONENTIAL time and space?

Go Perl.

Next on tap (1)

prisoner-of-enigma (535770) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980781)

Schroedinger Perl -- All assertions are assumed to be true and false at the same time until such time as someone observes your website, at which time your site is forced into a particular state. Neat, eh?

The superpositioned BSOD (2, Funny)

MoobY (207480) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980796)

After Microsoft's incredible implementation of the recursive crash (anyone remember the crash recovery that crashed?), this module now gives them a chance to have the superpositioned crash: your computer is both crashing and still alive.

awww... (2, Funny)

InsaneCreator (209742) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980828)

It's 2:30 am and I'm thinking how exciting quantum computing is.
Awwww... I need a life... :(

At least I might or might not have a life.

Hmmm.... (4, Funny)

Quixote (154172) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980829)

use Quantum; my $jump = Quantum::Leap->new(); # nothing happens... Damn! Why doesn't it work??

Re:Hmmm.... (1)

Cyclopedian (163375) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981046)

Man, you're supposed to provide the location of your previous life.

use Quantum; my $jump = Quantum::Leap->new($previous_life);

Now it works! Of course, there's that matter of "changing right from wrong" to let the new() function return. =)

-Cyc

Perl is a toy scriptlet (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980841)

Think Java. Write new applications in Java. Rewrite legacy apps with Java. Don't upgrade or downgrade. Sidegrade instead to a Java desktop device... I don't understand why anybody would be programming in anything other than Java.

Re:Perl is a toy scriptlet (0, Offtopic)

thogard (43403) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980936)

If you go to your local book store and look at the subjects in the computer language section you will find a very good metric that java had its 15 minutes of fame.

In the past the largest sections cycled through Pascal, Ada, Visual Basic, C++, Java or now C#. The section sizes of C, Cobol, Fortran and Perl are very consistant. I see this as a sign of what will be here in 30 years and what won't.

Java is a toy scriptlet (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980939)

Think QBasic. Write new applications in QBasic. Rewrite legacy apps with QBasic. Don't upgrade or downgrade. Sidegrade instead to a QBasic desktop device... I don't understand why anybody would be programming in anything other than QBasic.

Troll (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980844)

This comment is a TROLL. Some may also consider it offtopic, redundant, overrated, or even flamebait. Please MODERATE IT accordingly.

Alan Thicke. DEAD. (-1)

Alan_Thicke (553655) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980846)

I just heard the sad news on CBC radio. Comedy actor/writer Alan Thicke was found dead in his home this morning. Even if you never liked his work, you can appreciate what he did for 80's television. Truly a Canadian icon.
He will be missed :(



Show me That Smile (The Growing Pains Theme Song):

Show me that smile again.
Ooh show me that smile.
Don't waste another minute on your crying.
We're nowhere near the end.
We're nowhere near.
The best is ready to begin.

As long as we got each other [slashdot.org]
We got the world
Sitting right in our hands.
Baby rain or shine;
All the time.
We got each other
Sharing the laughter and love.

Re:Alan Thicke. DEAD. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980868)

make it stop.

Re:Alan Thicke. DEAD. (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981095)

Give it up. Didn't ANAL COX die in some freak accident involving goats, a rubber ducky, and the MODPROBE source code? Maybe he optimized it too much. Maybe he shouldn't stick source up his ass if he doesn't know where it's been. Go write about ANAL COX's untimely death. Truly a HOMOSEXUAL LUNIX FAG icon. He won't be missed... Or something.

Article Quote (2)

Catiline (186878) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980849)

"This still leaves us with plenty of ways to make Perl behave in a thoroughly unpredictable fashion."

Is it just me, or doesn't "good Perl code" already work that way unless you've spent the past 10 years developing for it? I for one can't make heads or tails of tight Perl coding methods.

CRASH (2, Funny)

ZaneMcAuley (266747) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980864)

And when one of these application crashes, itll go with a bang allright.... *Access Violation* there goes the space-time continuim..

Wife::Cook module next? (0, Funny)

Frank of Earth (126705) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980874)

Much like the Quantum module, you can test it on Perl, but don't expand any real time applications any time soon.

Re:Wife::Cook module next? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980889)

moron

Stupid function names (2, Informative)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980881)

They use the entangle() function to create a variable whose value is a superposition of several possibilities. Simply having a superposition does not mean entanglement (even in Perl, believe it or not) so they could have named it better.

Also, remember that this does not turn your box into a quantum computer. It's well known already that quantum computers cannot do anything that normal computers can't (they both are Turing machines); they just do some things quite a bit faster.

Re:Stupid function names (2)

Karma Sucks (127136) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981079)

> It's well known already that quantum computers cannot do anything that normal computers can't (they both are Turing machines); they just do some things quite a bit faster.

Sorry, no. It's not well-known. This is like asserting that classical physics is equivalent to quantum physics, which is essentially what you are doing. Perhaps you are restricting your definition of Quantum computers too severely.

I would like to assert myself that Quantum computers should be able to simulate a Quantum reality, whereas Classical computers pretty much can't do this.

Please quote your sources or quit talking out of your ass!

Re:Stupid function names (1)

cronik (196639) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981142)

If I may modify that; Quantum computers exploit QM by design (in other words they make there calcs by taking on diffrent quantum states) while classical computers simulate quantum states. (yes they are very diffrent)

sphincter boy michael owes me an apology (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980882)

I submitted this story 3 months ago...

Now to deal with that nasty Halting Problem.... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980894)

I must admit that I didn't read through the entire article, but what I understand from quantum computation, this development might allow someone to implement a solution to the halting problem. I remember reading that Deutch (I think that is his name can't be sure tho my notes aren't here...perhaps someone who knows could help out) had shown that with quantum computation a decider can be made for the halting problem.

If this module is powerful enough, perhaps we could find ourselves in quite a mess of a 'turing machine' solving the halting problem due an implementation of quantum effects. Of course this should be impossible so the theory goes, but what if?

My knowledge of computation theory is limited and if there is expert that could sway me one way or the other I think quite a few of us would be interested.

Not only for Perl (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2980926)

There's a C++ version of the library here [bluedust.com] .

Just thought you'd want to know

How is it... (1)

evilpaul13 (181626) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980972)

That people can know how to program a Quantum Computer, when no such device yet exists? (I'm not counting the two Qubit ones when something like six are needed to do anything useful)

"Quantum" programming in Perl, oh brother.. (5, Informative)

amitola (557122) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980985)

Although I can't get to the article right now, I do know a little about quantum computing thanks to having just finished a thesis on the subject.

Studying the actual research in the field reveals that a real quantum device does not at all resemble a superintelligent "infinitely-faster-than-my-Pentium-4" computer of the future. To understand the difference requires understanding the fundamental nature of a quantum device and how it differs from a digital device.

The atomic unit of a quantum computer is a physical system of some sort that exhibits quantum behavior, such as a single electron and its spin. Whatever the implementation, the unit is called a qubit. A single qubit contains information sometimes described as a vector of complex numbers.

A digital computer, of course, operates on bits which allow only two states, the most common implementation of which is a high or low voltage at some defined point in an electrical circuit.

Some operations are natural and easy to perform on bits; these are AND, OR, NOT, XOR, and their Boolean friends. These operations, in turn, lend themselves to an easy and natural implementation of integer math. Other operations do not have a natural representation in digital computers, such as real-number arithmetic. For the relatively few occasions that call for irrational numbers, we make do with approximations and call it "floating-point" math.

The qubit's advantage is that, thanks to quantum mechanics, some operations which are very difficult for a digital computer are easy and natural for qubits. Notably, a set of qubits can perform a Fourier transformation in near constant time--an astounding operation that is so far believed to be impossible on any kind of Turing machine.

The other side of the coin, which is rarely understood by mainstream news reporters, is that the qubit is completely unable to address most of the rest of our favorite operations, such as integer addition. To ask a qubit to count from 0 to 9 is extremely difficult, maybe physically impossible.

If that weren't bad enough, quantum algorithms have to deal with other constraints such as the prohibition against creating a copy of an unknown quantum state. Therefore, your quantum Perl is going to have to start by doing away with the assignment operator. Qubits also have a nasty tendency to occasionally do things completely unexpected and unpredictable; this requires massively redundant calculations to reduce the probability of error to something acceptably small. (Of course digital computers suffer from random bit rot as well; it is solved with similar error detection and correction algorithms.)

All these obstacles discouraged any serious interest in quantum devices for some time. However, recently (1997?) Peter Shor published the first important quantum algorithm, which factors large composite numbers in polynomial time. In case you don't know, a computer with such a capability would have staggering implications. Much of the world's data protection is based on the RSA algorithm which relies on the difficulty of factoring large numbers.

Hence, the last few years have seen no shortage of funding or interest in quantum computing. Unfortunately, the mainstream media has caught just enough of the conversation to get the false idea that quantum computers are going to blow away all of the digital technology in existence, coming soon to a Best Buy near you.

Anyway, the moral of the story is, don't start saving for that Pentium-Q just yet; not only is a quantum device completely inappropriate for the overwhelming majority of computing tasks, but the current state of the art is a machine on the order of 10 qubits or so. (A few hundred qubits will be needed before Shor's algorithm presents a threat to current encryption.)

More realistically, you might expect to see one day in your lifetime a "quantum processing unit" that exists as a special-purpose extension to your digital processor--think along the lines of the 80287 floating point coprocessor. Even this kind of application is decades away at best.

Re:"Quantum" programming in Perl, oh brother.. (1)

The Pi-Guy (529892) | more than 12 years ago | (#2980999)

don't start saving for that Pentium-Q just yet

I know I won't; looking at the current P4's 'fuzzy math', the last thing I need is my PQ (Pentium-Q) or QPU (Quantum Processing Unit) getting me a decryption key for my database that's 'close enough' and will transform it into pr0n...

Ah, Intel.
--pi

Re:"Quantum" programming in Perl, oh brother.. (1)

Uller-RM (65231) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981062)

Shor's algorithm was 1994.

More than a few hundred qubits will be needed, also. Shor's algorithm requires two registers of length N. Most Diffie-Hellman keys these days are 1024 bits, with some larger. I don't expect to see it in my lifetime, honestly. But when it does, there will be a shitstorm to beat all shitstorms. Some folks need to get cracking on an encryption process that doesn't rely on the intractability of factoring... they've got maybe 50 years to do it.

Re:"Quantum" programming in Perl, oh brother.. (1)

snarkh (118018) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981117)

There are already several encryption algorithms that do not rely on the computational complexity of factoring. One of the them, for example, is elliptic curve cryptosystem. It is not known whether there is a quantum algorithm which breaks it efficiently, but then again it is not known where there is an aglorithm for ordinary computers to test for primality.

Re:"Quantum" programming in Perl, oh brother.. (1)

cronik (196639) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981127)

There is already a way to do this (if expensive) using two lines of communication one being a fiber that keeps polarization, and the other any other method of communication. By exploiting some of the principles of QM you can both assure "perfect" encryption (one time random key) and tell if your fiber is secure (nessary to assure the key is safe). At the Tx end you would randomly switch between one of 4 polarizations V,H,CCW,CW (keeping a record of the choices), then at the Rx there would be a device that first would either block V-H or CW-CCW polarized light (this model assumes perfect blockage but it is not nessesary) chosing between the two in a perfectly random fashion. Then you block one of the pair that should have gotten through (ie: either V or CCW) and see if a photon arrived. The Tx machine would then send a message telling which of the first filters should have been used. If the Rx side chose the wrong filter it would drop the bit and keep the rest. Both of the two sides would then send an encrypted message with a payload that would be decrypted, modified, encrypted and sent back. If the messages did not match then there was either a transmit error or a snooper on the fiber. Repeating the process a few times would allow you to decide which of the two were the case and decide if a switch needed to be made.


credit for this should go to someone else as IANAQP [|:P

ps: If there are typos or spelling errors and you cant understand what was said, I realy dont care and neither does anyone else, so cope with it.


pps: gramer too

Early Adaptors... (2)

Peridriga (308995) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981012)

I wonder... Who out of anybody would be the first group to adapt and use this...

SendSpamTo(any($a, $b, $c, {....})...

Wow... Quantum Spam... Imagine the possibilities of bandwidth usage...

Or How about...

DOSAttack(any($a, $b, $c, {....})...

A Quantum DOS attack...

Hey just thinking out load how slow the net could be in the future

The real use of this... (5, Informative)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981023)

I think this seems to be a bit lost on some people here. Obviously, it takes exponential time to simulate a lot of interesting things that would take polynomial time on a real quantum computer. This Perl simulator module is cool, but it's not going to prove or disprove P==NP.


The real use of this is for people who want to experiment with quantum _algorithms_ on small data sets and learn and understand better how quantum computers work and how quantum calculations are put together. Writing quantum algorithms is hard and confusing to somebody familiar with classical computation, even if you are familiar with quantum mechanics. There are very few useful quantum algorithms (Gover's search and Shor's factorization algorithms are the two most famous and interesting IMHO). This module might encourage more people to come up with and experiment with quantum algorithms that take advantage of the "inherently parallel" nature of quantum computing.


Note that though I am no expert, I did actually write something modestly similar to this Perl - an interpreter that read a series of meta-language commands and turned them into physical magnet pulses for spin flipping on an NMR quantum computer we had at MIT. We never bothered to write a simulator for it, but now that I think about it, it would be cool to have this. Kudos to these guys for doing this.


Now if somebody could just make a quantum computer with, say, 20 or 30 qubits I might be convinced that quantum computing could eventually do useful calculations and that the decoherence problems and setup problems for a large number of weakly coupled qubit units are not intractable. Perhaps an alternative to NMR as the substrate for quantum computing might get farther.

Troll (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2981066)

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Inga: Would you care to have a TROLL IN THE HAY? *extracharactersinthisline*
Freddy: A what?! *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: A TROLL IN THE HAY. Eet's fun!! *extracharactersinthisline*
*wagon lurches* *extracharactersinthisline*
Inga: Troll, troll, troll in the hay... *extracharactersinthisline*
*extracharactersinthisline*
Courtesy of Mel Brooks. *extracharactersinthisline*
And now, let's make this page longer!! *extracharactersinthisline*

Troll ^^ (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2981071)

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Sorry folks. That just ruled though.

MWAHAHAHA, you'll never know who trolled!! And I'm still gonna make this page a LOT longer!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHHHAAA!!!

Anal Cox. Dead. (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#2981099)

I just heard the sad news on the radio. The #2 kernel hacker ANAL COX was found dead in his home this morning. There aren't many details yet, but it appears he died from AUTOEROTIC ASPHYXIATION. Even if you never liked his work, you can appreciate what he did for the Linux kernel with his MODPROBE. Truly a HOMOSEXUAL LINUX icon. He will be missed. :(
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...