I agree that the term "quantum supremacy" is overly grandiose, but it was clearly defined before Google published this work. I just want to emphasise that ther

I agree that the term "quantum supremacy" is overly grandiose, but it was clearly defined before Google published this work. I just want to emphasise that there were people who believed that even this small step was impossible. Prominent quantum-computing skeptic Gil Kalai believes that scalable quantum computing is impossible in principle, and believes that this paper didn't achieve what it claims, but he says that his view would be refuted if they did! (This is in contrast to IBM, who isn't criticizing the quantum side of the experiment, but the comparison to classical computing; and to the Internet commentariat who are saying that even if they did everything they claim, it's not interesting).