2021.05.15 08:12:58 (1393449308368740352) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Aram Harrow (@quantum_aram)" (1393010375382245381):
Reality check: @preskill admitted (1) "the word exacerbates the already overhyped reporting on the status of quantum technology"; (2) he "anticipated" this when he introduced the "quantum supremacy" term. This word choice deceives people, including politicians funding the area.
2021.05.15 08:21:45 (1393451519421288448) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
Feigning ignorance of the deception---or saying "How could we possibly talk about a quantum-circuit demo except as quantum supremacy? Quantum dominance has two different definitions in the literature, and quantum superiority has three!"---doesn't make the ethical issue go away.
2021.05.14 03:08:49 (1393010375382245381) from "Aram Harrow (@quantum_aram)", replying to "𝖬𝖺𝗁𝖽𝗂 𝖢𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗀𝗁𝖼𝗁𝗂 $8 (@mahdi_tcs)" (1391552783657185287):
I think 'quantum supremacy' is fine. If people are confused about the prospects for scalable useful quantum computers, fiddling with word choices is not going to make a difference.