3 karma · joined August 13, 2014
For the last 40 years, we were promised a better living standard in exchange for lower taxes. It backfired. We forgot about the vice that has no bounds - greed. That's why we have to set limits. Paul alludes to the correct and only solution - make tax rates so high to discourage accumulating wealth beyond a certain point.
It's a wave, but the wave has crested. Tax rates will rise, the loopholes will be removed, and the existing tax laws will start to get enforced. Too bad, it could have been different.
Here are the costs for a 50 rps lambda function served by API Gateway for one month:
Requests = 50x60x60x24x30 = 129,600,000 request per month API Gateway Costs = 129,600,000 x 3.5/M = $453
Convert the requests to GB/s at 512M and 100ms requests, we get:
129,600,000 x 512/1024 * .1 = $113
$453 + $113 = $566/mo for 50rps. Please note the .1 multiplier. For every 100ms increase in your request time, add another $113. So for a 1 second request, you get $1130.
This doesn't even count other machines you need to run to handle databases, etc, it's for the most bare vanilla request.
For a simple lambda function with no external servers, you can easily serve 50rps from a micro for $9/month.
Brady and Anderson's point is that it's not a qubit until you can calculate with it. And their theory suggests it will get exponentially harder for each qubit above 4 (I think), which throws out all of the interesting quantum algorithms.
I also felt Brady and Anderson silenced every objection. After one or more of their rebuttals, they were no longer challenged. The most recent post about Feynman is also interesting.
In any event, it is a fascinating blog post.
Also, check out this fascinating debate about these matters on Scott Aaronson's blog. Link is http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1255
Brady and Anderson have many posts in this debate, and IMHO, wind up winning.
It's looking more and more like physics took a wrong turn with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics.
You'll need to spend a little bit of time learning how to write a patent description. It's a tedious (rather than say, hard) thing to do, but is a great skill to learn anyway.
Once you get the hang of it, getting a provisional patent for any or your ideas is quite easy. Then you shouldn't have any qualms about divulging any aspect of your idea to anyone.
You can legally say that your idea or product is 'patent pending' with a provisional patent. This may sound silly to some, but will definitely sway a serious investor. Like them or not, patents are powerful.
As I said, this buys you a year. That should be enough time to determine if the idea is worth the time and expense to obtain a full patent.