Yeah, I actually frequented a sim center when I lived in the US. They ran Rfactor2 but it got me doing some iRacing too. It was great fun! I can’t believe how real a lot of it felt. Honestly except for elevation not translating well it was an insane practice tool

Yeah, only IRL for a bike. If they made a really legit sim rig I’d probably have to seriously consider it!

Ah cool! After i raced irl for like a decade I sim raced for a while. It was super fun! I’d like to get back into it someday. It’s a lot better on the wallet and body than IRL stuff (especially motorcycles).

I think it helps, but it probably is more of a selling point and aesthetic than an actual help on the (agreed) biggest selling point number.

It’s one of those decisions that someone up top probably made and has these kinds of stupid consequences of moving fast and breaking shit. I wouldn’t be upset if it had to go to a normal one

Source on that? Hobbiest aerodynamics nerd and big into F1 (and did a lot of liquid system design engineering in a previous job). Genuinely curious!

My gut feel is that a half kilo of unsprung weight (those ridiculous wheels), tighter fenders, or a bit of tail teardropping would go so much further than anything door-handle-wise. It’s certainly helping promote flow attachment, but you’ve got poor flow rates there because of the wing mirrors anyway

That’s fair, Shor’s algorithm would probably break a bunch of older encryption. It’s a little further out of reach, in terms of feasibility but who knows how fast it could speed up

That’s how it’s been explained to me by laymen many many times. Just casually (ish, I have a math degree) looking at the math, chatting with a friend who is a quantum physicist, being involved with computers, etc I find that Grover’s Algorithm is not at all capable of something like that. I’m not sure there’s anything better in terms of breaking encryption

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover's_algorithm

Grover’s algorithm could brute-force a 128-bit symmetric cryptographic key in roughly 264 iterations, or a 256-bit key in roughly 2128 iterations. It may not be the case that Grover’s algorithm poses a significantly increased risk to encryption over existing classical algorithms, however.[4]

I am stoked for what it could do for protein folding, or other heavy simulation work, but in terms of proper encryption I don’t believe it actually will change much.

Nah I’d put money on it being quantum computing. I think quantum has some neat applications, and the tech is cool as hell. But I think it’ll be sold like “this is gonna instantly transform business overnight” and people will try to sell quantum computing power