You mentioned that some of the details are beyond your math skills. The reason I am so vocal against claims that Dwave have a quantum computer is because I work

You mentioned that some of the details are beyond your math skills. The reason I am so vocal against claims that Dwave have a quantum computer is because I work in this field (Yale Quantum Institute) and these details are what my work is about. The "qubits" Dwave has most certainly are not entangled and even they have never claimed it. Dwave themselves have stopped claiming they have a quantum computer, and have introduced this term "quantum annealing" which is something that you can more efficiently do on a classical computer. Yes, you can buy something from Dwave, so it is not vaporware, it is just snake oil. This is why it is frustrating for me to respond to your comments: you are dismissing the very measurable progress my colleagues have done over the last two decades (just look at qubit lifetimes, "break even" error correction procedures, generation of entangled pairs, etc) while claiming that a device that is incapable of sustaining any particularly interesting quantum state is to be held in high regard. And while Dwave's engineering efforts should be praised, their misleading PR has led to false misleading claims like yours and for that at least their PR department deserves to be shunned.