Referring to the point where quantum computers are better at one esoteric thing that's not even useful as a "singularity" is laughably atrociously ridiculous. T

Referring to the point where quantum computers are better at one esoteric thing that's not even useful as a "singularity" is laughably atrociously ridiculous. The actual relevant technical term is "quantum supremacy" [1], which is already misleading (implies complete dominance but actually refers to not being completely dominated). There's no need to make it worse! Also, the theorists didn't "pinpoint" anything. They showed that quantum supremacy via boson sampling was harder than previously thought. They improved the classical simulation algorithm, raising the bar quantum computers will have to jump over. I guess popsci has standards for terribleness that just weren't being met? They couldn't pick a merely semi-terrible title, like "Scientists raise the quantum supremacy bar"? 1: https://arxiv.org/abs/1203.5813 https://arxiv.org/abs/1203.5813