I remain optimistic, but some potential holes are starting to show. Scott Aaronson: (http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3389 http://www.scottaaronson.com/blo

I remain optimistic, but some potential holes are starting to show. Scott Aaronson: (http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3389 http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3389) "To everyone who keeps asking me about the “new” P≠NP proof: I’d again bet $200,000 that the proof won’t stand, except that the last time I tried that, it didn’t achieve its purpose, which was to get people to stop asking me about it. So: the paper claims to give an exponential circuit lower bound for Andreev’s function, but that function as defined in Section 7 of the paper seems clearly to have a polynomial-size circuit, based on polynomial interpolation (thanks to Luca Trevisan for this observation). So I don’t see how this can possibly stand. Please just stop asking, and if the thing hasn’t been fully refuted by the end of the week, you can come back and tell me I was a closed-minded fool."