Michael Whitaker

Qubits can encode and process exponentially more information than a classical bit by taking advantage of superposition, a property of quantum particles that allows them to exist in several states at once. Creating stable qubits has proved to be extraordinarily difficult. Right now, even the most advanced quantum computers only use about a thousand qubits.

Qubits can encode and process exponentially more information than a classical bit by taking advantage of superposition, a property of quantum particles that allows them to exist in several states at once. Creating stable qubits has proved to be extraordinarily difficult. Right now, even the most advanced quantum computers only use about a thousand qubits.

Microsoft claims that they now have a clear pathway to delivering a million qubit chip that can, quote, fit in the palm of one's hand. All the world's current computers operating together can't do what a one million qubit quantum computer will be able to do.

Microsoft claims that they now have a clear pathway to delivering a million qubit chip that can, quote, fit in the palm of one's hand. All the world's current computers operating together can't do what a one million qubit quantum computer will be able to do.

Who are the engineering firms in Mexico? Who has the intellectual capacity to build one of these sophisticated tunnels? Start looking at those companies and those architects and those engineers and working it from the Mexican side. But of course, that would require more cooperation from the Mexican government, which is another question.

Who are the engineering firms in Mexico? Who has the intellectual capacity to build one of these sophisticated tunnels? Start looking at those companies and those architects and those engineers and working it from the Mexican side. But of course, that would require more cooperation from the Mexican government, which is another question.

So Donald Trump's attorneys made an 11th hour bid to the Supreme Court, hoping that they would delay that sentencing in his hush money case. Instead, what happened in a five to four decision, the justices rejected his request for an automatic stay. And Chief Justice John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett, joined the liberal justices in denying Trump's appeal.

So Donald Trump's attorneys made an 11th hour bid to the Supreme Court, hoping that they would delay that sentencing in his hush money case. Instead, what happened in a five to four decision, the justices rejected his request for an automatic stay. And Chief Justice John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett, joined the liberal justices in denying Trump's appeal.

So what that does is it clears the way for today's sentencing by Judge Juan Merchan. Now, Merchan has indicated that he will not make jail time part of the punishment, and that did factor into the Supreme Court's decision not to issue a stay on the sentencing.

So what that does is it clears the way for today's sentencing by Judge Juan Merchan. Now, Merchan has indicated that he will not make jail time part of the punishment, and that did factor into the Supreme Court's decision not to issue a stay on the sentencing.

They said that the sentencing wasn't burdensome enough to stay and that Trump's arguments against the verdict could be heard in the regular appeals process. So this is not over yet.

They said that the sentencing wasn't burdensome enough to stay and that Trump's arguments against the verdict could be heard in the regular appeals process. So this is not over yet.

So what this case really comes down to is national security versus free speech. You have on one side a lot of Republicans, including FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr and the attorneys general of 22 states who have backed the law that will require this ban to go into effect next week if ByteDance doesn't sell its American holdings in the company.

So what this case really comes down to is national security versus free speech. You have on one side a lot of Republicans, including FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr and the attorneys general of 22 states who have backed the law that will require this ban to go into effect next week if ByteDance doesn't sell its American holdings in the company.

Now, they argue that TikTok poses a threat because of ByteDance's ties to China, given that Chinese business law allows the CCP to harvest the data of Americans, including location, browsing habits, personal details, things like that. And that kind of spying could be used to blackmail American officials. Just one example of the national security risks.

Now, they argue that TikTok poses a threat because of ByteDance's ties to China, given that Chinese business law allows the CCP to harvest the data of Americans, including location, browsing habits, personal details, things like that. And that kind of spying could be used to blackmail American officials. Just one example of the national security risks.

So they're also concerned about how the app's algorithm could be used to promote Chinese propaganda to American users. In fact, two different academic studies have found that TikTok has done exactly this. For example, one found that the app suppressed negative news related to Chinese treatment of the Uyghurs, and it promoted content that denied its human rights abuses.

So they're also concerned about how the app's algorithm could be used to promote Chinese propaganda to American users. In fact, two different academic studies have found that TikTok has done exactly this. For example, one found that the app suppressed negative news related to Chinese treatment of the Uyghurs, and it promoted content that denied its human rights abuses.

So in essence, the Justice Department is arguing that this law is not targeting speech, but only foreign control of the platform. But on the other side, TikTok is asking the court to block the law because they say it's a violation of free speech. So one, they argue the law is only being applied to TikTok and not to other businesses that also have Chinese-owned parent companies.

So in essence, the Justice Department is arguing that this law is not targeting speech, but only foreign control of the platform. But on the other side, TikTok is asking the court to block the law because they say it's a violation of free speech. So one, they argue the law is only being applied to TikTok and not to other businesses that also have Chinese-owned parent companies.