TLDR; I don't think this twitter thread is good public science communication, and should not appear on the HN frontpage. As a quantum computing researcher, I c

TLDR; I don't think this twitter thread is good public science communication, and should not appear on the HN frontpage. As a quantum computing researcher, I can't make head and tail of what OP is saying after and including tweet 7. I don't think OP understands interference correctly. As someone points out elsewhere in the comment section, she might mean decoherence, but I can only evaluate what she has written. She also makes light of the theoretical computational complexity results underlying the demonstration of quantum supremacy using random circuits. This experiment's results and interpretation might be iffy at best, but the underlying strategy of the quantum computing community in this matter are sound. We don't want to keep asking for funding for the next 20 years without proofs of principles in between, and this experiment is one step along the way.