Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring

scottaaronson.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–67 of 67 posts

Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring

#61

Post by vouaobrasil »

As a former researcher in the sciences, I get the feeling that "cargo cult" research is not all that uncommon, especially when a idea gets embedded in the popular stream of thought. There is a whole cluster of cargo cult publishing when it comes to evolutionary theory because of the misunderstanding of natural selection. In mathematics there is Godel's incompleteness theorems, and in computer science we have quantum computing.

With regard to quantum computing, I find it as irritating as the author of the blog. And I honestly think the internet is to blame, because it has increased the reward for being notorious, at least in the sense that there is more attention bestowed upon you for making spurious claims. And I believe the internet is also to blame for people desiring such attention, because the technology of the internet has displaced genuine, social interaction with superficial fluff that bears little resemblance to what humans actually need to feel socially fulfilled.

Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring

#62

Post by stephc_int13 »

moffkalast wrote: post #51
melling wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are over 20 names on that paper. That is unusual?

In academia? No. Everyone and their mom will add their name to any paper they can to get references.

Yeah, and this is a as bad as it sounds.

A pyramidal scheme, nothing less.

Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring

#64

Post by barathr »

krastanov wrote: post #25
dQw4w9WgXcQ wrote: post #21

Eventually Scott Aaronson will be wrong. Call it a reverse black swan, but we will all remember it as the day the quantum computing era began.

Scott Aaronson is not a quantum-computing skeptic, quite the opposite, he has always seemed optimistic about its prospects and his work has been fundamental to progress in the field. He just does not like hyped-up work that has little substance. If anything, Bruce Schneier should have been a bit more skeptical - this type hyped-up unreviewed preprint papers appear very frequently these days.

I think he was fairly skeptical but said the proof would come when someone tries to implement it; he now links to Aaronson's take in his original blog post.

Re: Cargo Cult Quantum Factoring

#65

Post by ddri »

nyrikki wrote: post #60
inasio wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wanted to point out that Scott Aaronson is not one of those anti quantum curmudgeons. Besides bashing on companies with questionable claims, I think he's been pretty open minded about looking for problems and algorithms with actual quantum advantages.

As someone who lived though one AI winter and seriously fears another, I view fighting hype is important to allowing useful research to happen. 'Super position' and 'entanglement' have been overly mystified in QM in general and the implications of probabilistic Turing machines vs the typical non-deterministic Turning machine examples is important. While probabilistic Turing machines are non-deterministic, they don't…

We are perhaps in something of a "quantum winter" at the moment, given the activity on the financial side of the QC industry as far as reverse listings, SPACs, and mergers have gone.

I work in this field as I find it compelling and the challenges of finding a worthy business case that applies beyond the fantastical potentials is one I feel worth my efforts/years. But equally open to failure where such yields an advance in our learning.

Aaronson is always an entertaining voice in the industry, although his focus on AI means less than I would hope to nudge us along at times. But he was in fine form at Q2B conference in Santa Clara recently, and I'm not anywhere near close to my contributions to the industry to ignore his thoughts as valuable to the discourse. Especially when pushing back on the emotional velocity we might have at times.

Post reply on HN