3 ms·
Sure wish I could still flag submissions. As maggit points out, (exactly as I did 228 days ago[1]) D-Wave has a long, long history of writing press releases th
by sbierwagen 15y ago
Sure wish I could still flag submissions.
As maggit points out, (exactly as I did 228 days ago[1]) D-Wave has a long, long history of writing press releases that sound very interesting; then completely failing to follow them up.
An Arxiv preprint is a step up from a press release, but it's still not a peer reviewed paper. I haven't read it, nor do I know enough number theory to comment intelligently on its contents, but judging from D-Wave's past history of behavior, this paper is almost certainly fraudulent.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is not extraordinary evidence.
1: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2593323 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2593323
- malvosenior 15y agoYou can purchase a working D-Wave machine today. I'm not sure how that qualifies as "failing to follow them up".
- Dylan16807 15y agoEasy, I'll quote the end of the article. The company's approach to computing, known as adiabatic quantum computing, has been heavily criticised. Various physicists have said that the theory behind the machine is flawed and that the company has shown little evidence of the kind of improvement expected over classical computers.
- jessriedel 15y agoScott Aaronson has blogged about the misleading claims of D-wave in the past. Here is his take on the Nature article they published back in May, which he found to be their least bad effort to date, i.e. the only one that he wasn't able to immediately discredit as a computer scientist. http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=639 http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=639