Peer (同伴) Assisted Study Sessions (PASS) is a peer-facilitated learning programme available to students enrolled (注册) in most core units of study in our business school.

PASS involves weekly sessions where you work in groups to tackle specially prepared problem sets, based around a unit of study you're enrolled in.

PASS doesn't re-teach or deliver new content. It's an opportunity to deepen your understanding of the key points from lecture materials while you are applying your skills to solve problems.

You work interactively with your peers. As a peer group, you decide what is covered in each session. That way, PASS directly responds to your needs and feedback.

Registration in Term 2 will open at 9 am, 21 September 2022.

Waiting lists

If a session is full, you can register for the waiting list. We will email you if a place becomes available or if a new session is to be held.

When you are placed on a waiting list, we will email you a number which tells you where you are on the list. If you are close to the front of the list, you have a good chance of gaining a place in the programme in the near future.

Deregistering

If you miss two PASS sessions in a row, you will be deregistered and your place will be given to someone on the waiting list. Make sure you fill in the attendance sheet at each session to record your attendance.

You'll be informed by email if you are being deregistered as a result of missing sessions. If you believe you have received the email in error, email the PASS office at passoffice@umbs.edu.

Quantum (量子) computers have been on my mind a lot lately. A friend has been sending me articles on how quantum computers might help solve some of the biggest challenges we face as humans. I've also had exchanges with two quantum-computing experts. One is computer scientist Chris Johnson who I see as someone who helps keep the field honest. The other is physicist Philip Taylor.

For decades, quantum computing has been little more than a laboratory curiosity. Now, big tech companies have invested in quantum computing, as have many smaller ones. According to Business Weekly, quantum machines could help us "cure cancer, and even take steps to turn climate change in the opposite direction." This is the sort of hype (炒作) that annoys Johnson. He worries that researchers are making promises they can't keep. "What's new," Johnson wrote, "is that millions of dollars are now potentially available to quantum computing researchers.

As quantum computing attracts more attention and funding, researchers may mislead investors, journalists, the public and, worst of all, themselves about their work's potential. If researchers can't keep their promises, excitement might give way to doubt, disappointment and anger, Johnson warns. Lots of other technologies have gone through stages of excitement. But something about quantum computing makes it especially prone to hype, Johnson suggests, perhaps because ""quantum' stands for something cool you shouldn't be able to understand." And that brings me back to Taylor, who suggested that I read his book Q for Quantum.

After I read the book, Taylor patiently answered my questions about it. He also answered my questions about PyQuantum, the firm he co-founded in 2016. Taylor shares Johnson's concerns about hype, but he says those concerns do not apply to PyQuantum.

The company, he says, is closer than any other firm "by a very large margin (幅度)" to building a "useful quantum computer, one that "solves an impactful problem that we would not have been able to solve otherwise." He adds, "People will naturally discount my opinions, but I have spent a lot of time quantitatively comparing what we are doing with others"

Could PyQuantum really be leading all the competition "by a wide margin", as Taylor claims? I don't know. I'm certainly not going to advise my friend or anyone else to invest in quantum computers. But I trust Taylor, just as I trust Johnson.

When almost everyone has a mobile phone, why are more than half of Australian homes still paying for a landline (座机)

These days you'd be hard pressed to find anyone in Australia over the age of 15 who doesn't own a mobile phone. In fact plenty of younger kids have one in their pocket. Practically everyone can make and receive calls anywhere, anytime.

Still, 55 percent of Australians have a landline phone at home and only just over a quarter （29%） rely only on their smartphones, according to a survey （调查）.Of those Australians who still have a landline, a third concede that it's not really necessary and they're keeping it as a security blanket —19 percent say they never use it while a further 13 percent keep it in case of emergencies. I think my home falls into that category.

More than half of Australian homes are still choosing to stick with their home phone. Age is naturally a factor （因素）-only 58 percent of Generation Ys still use landlines now and then, compared to 84 percent of Baby Boomers who've perhaps had the same home number for 50 years. Age isn't the only factor; I'd say it's also to do with the makeup of your household.

Generation Xers with young families, like my wife and I, can still find it convenient to have a home phone rather than providing a mobile phone for every family member. That said, to be honest the only people who ever ring our home phone are our Baby Boomers parents, to the point where we play a game and guess who is calling before we pick up the phone （using Caller ID would take the fun out of it）.

How attached are you to your landline? How long until they go the way of gas street lamps and morning milk deliveries?