Contrast with HN discussion of the purported breakthrough: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34235350
I’m not seeing the contrast. Aaronson speaks more definitively. But the top comments on HN [1][2] were well-reasoned scepticism.
Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
11–20 of 67 posts
Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#12Contrast with HN discussion of the purported breakthrough: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34235350
I’m not seeing the contrast. Aaronson speaks more definitively. But the top comments on HN [1][2] were well-reasoned scepticism. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34237886 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34237218
And Schneier's own post expressed skepticism while noting that this is something that should be check-able now.
Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#13Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#14One of the most fun (?) parts of academia is the unique blend of frustration and satisfaction that results when a shoddy paper somehow clears peer review only to get eviscerated when it lands on the desk of an actual expert.
"the detailed exploration of irrelevancies" LOL, if that isn't a "time-tested" method for making a paper sound academic, I don't know what is.
Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#15Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#16One of the most fun (?) parts of academia is the unique blend of frustration and satisfaction that results when a shoddy paper somehow clears peer review only to get eviscerated when it lands on the desk of an actual expert. "the detailed exploration of irrelevancies" LOL, if that isn't a "time-tested" method for making a paper sound academic, I don't know what is.
It hasn't cleared peer review, it's a preprint (which is pretty common in cryptography, peer review usually happens when results are already old news).
Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#17Contrast with HN discussion of the purported breakthrough: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34235350
I’m not seeing the contrast. Aaronson speaks more definitively. But the top comments on HN [1][2] were well-reasoned scepticism. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34237886 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34237218
While it's indeed true that the top two threads' root comments are sceptical, replies to them, and further threads, present counter-arguments — one could easily come away from reading the HN discussion thinking that there's something to this paper. (And indeed, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34261645)
Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#18Real title: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring
#19He's referring to this: https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.12372 Scott's take: > NO. JUST NO.
There are over 20 names on that paper. That is unusual?