Comment by ColinWright | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ColinWright | Hacker News Reader

This is the second time you've submitted this in a week, which is a reasonable thing to do, because (at least on the surface) it seems to be an interesting article. But it's not likely to get much of a response, because it's been submitted before, and even had some discussion.

The top comment on one of them[0] is by fyi1183:

> This is basically the TCS version of a clickbait headline. It's a separation of BQP and PH by an oracle. Certainly a nice result, but to put it into context, we also have a separation of P and NP by an oracle. Yet, we are very far away from actually proving that P and NP are distinct.

Here are some previous submissions:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18907424

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17680053

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17554510

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17394357 (2 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17385799

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17381474

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17368493 (32 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17366987

Thanks for those links. I can't help but wonder, though, why are you following my submission history so closely that you would notice this?

It's pretty obvious if you use the "past" link on this post. One needn't look at your history to see it.

I think this type of calling-out behavior is overly nitpicky. Let the upvotes decide.

I read the title and thought "I've read this before". So I clicked on the "past" link and there were these previous submissions. In checking them for past discussions to see if people had anything particularly interesting to say I noticed in passing that the most recent previous submission was by you.

So don't panic, I'm not stalking you, it's just that I remember what I've read, and when something has been submitted multiple times I have a look at the submitters.

Yet it's on the front page at number 24.

Frankly I look at quantum posts to giggle at the uselessness of it all. Good research maybe, but at least 30 years before anything particularly useful will likely pop up. No?

No.

To expand, I wonder if people expect progress to come much faster after super computers reach the scale of solving quantum systems of “useful scale”.

I think they do. But would Moore's law apply?

Probably too early to guess. I’m hopeful for a breakthrough though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com