D-Wave Blog

You mean the paper that has been countered with [1]? Regarding this I'd wait and see what the reaction to the counter is going to be, I for one am certainly not convinced that modeling one particular implementation classically would disprove quantum computing for any of the implementations. As far as I've read we have enough examples where only quantum models fit, which all would have to be debunked. [1] http://dwave.wordpress.com/2014/02/04/the-recent-how-quantum-is-the-d-…

I am not so sure. I don't understand work well but there have been a couple papers saying they can get a quantum speed up on factorizing using adiabatic quantum computers [1]. Further, Geordie Rise himself said that they have an algorithm that can run on a dwave system that can beat shors algorithm [2]. A more skeptical take is here [3]. [1]. http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:680572/FULLTEXT01.pdf [2]. https://dwave.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/learning-to-program-the-d-wave-… [3]. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21699-controversial-quantum-com…

from 2011 http://dwave.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/learning-to-program-the-d-wave-o… > The main processor doesn’t run an OS in the sense you’re thinking of. The OS is written in LISP and isn’t exposed to developers at this point. > No, but the APIs we’ve got are basically wrappers around lisp, so it would be easy to make one. Just figured the number of lisp coders out there was probably pretty small.

Important comment from Geordie on the dwave blog: "It’s absolutely possible that adding active error correction might help at some point, maybe even in the next generation. If that is the case, we’ll certainly try anything anyone can think of to make the processors work better! In the specific case of exhibiting scaling differences over conventional algorithms, I’d bet we don’t need error correction (at least at the current snapshot) but at the next level (say 2000+ qubits) maybe we might. If we do, no problem — we’ll find a way!" http://dwave.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/first-ever-head-to-head-win-in-s…

Geordie's (Dwave's CTO) rebuttal: [1] "The majority of that post is simply factually incorrect. I used to find this stuff vaguely amusing in an irritating kind of way. Now I just find it boring and I wonder why anyone listens to a guy who’s been wrong exactly 100% of the time about everything. Update your priors, people!! If you want to know what’s really going on, listen to the real experts. Like Hartmut. [2]" [1] http://dwave.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/first-ever-head-to-head-win-in-s… [2] http://googleresearch.blogspot.ca/2013/05/launching-quantum-artificial…

D-Wave does have a factoring algorithm. See the comments from D-Wave here: http://dwave.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/learning-to-program-the-d-wave-o… "We do have a factoring algorithm that I’m going to do a series of blog posts on"

D-Wave does have a factoring algorithm. See the comments from D-Wave here: http://dwave.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/learning-to-program-the-d-wave-o… "We do have a factoring algorithm that I’m going to do a series of blog posts on"

Its OS is built with alien technology (aka LISP) http://dwave.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/learning-to-program-the-d-wave-o…

This is false. I guarantee you, scientists would be very interested if they actually demonstrated entanglement. For example, in the slides of the linked talk, the presenter goes over a very general measure of entanglement which allows you to construct after-the-fact a "witness" of entanglement. It is respected theory, and a credible last-resort approach; no numbers. His latest preprint[1] doesn't have a clear claim either. The Newscientist section refers to a conference 2 weeks ago, without published abstracts, procedings, or video. I'll believe it when I see it (there's no indication Aram's quote is in context, but maybe he has). The first thing any qc lab does when they get their second qubit is make an entangled state and measure Bell Inequality violation. D-wave's lack of interest in this or in running Shor[2] is very telling. Everybody wants to run Shor, it's where the money is. [1] http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.1739 [2] http://dwave.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/computational-universality/#comm…