Thinking fast and slow daniel kahneman online dating

16-Jul-2017 06:33

Now imagine that closer examination of the clinical trial revealed that it showed nothing of the kind: it compared against the wrong drugs.

And imagine that a more relevant clinical trial—mostly unmentioned in the press—had been done, and discovered that when you compare to the right drugs, the drugs do better.

I left without asking questions, not wanting to be the one to instigate an unpleasant confrontation, and—I’ll admit—questioning my own sanity as a result of no one else asking about the gigantic elephant in the room. Among the many interesting comments below, see especially this one by Alex Selby, who says he’s written his own specialist solver for one class of the Mc Geoch and Wang benchmarks that significantly outperforms the software (and D-Wave machine) tested by Mc Geoch and Wang on those benchmarks—and who provides the Python code so you can try it yourself.

Also, Igor Vernik asked me to announce that on July 8th, D-Wave will be giving a technical presentation at the International Superconducting Electronics Conference in Cambridge.

Even if not, isn’t it possible that the startup will manage to develop an effective gene therapy sometime in the future? And anyway, at least they’re out there to make gene therapy work!

So we should all support them, rather than relentlessly criticizing.

etc., then repeated the speedup claims as if the more informative comparisons simply didn’t exist.This will be my final update on this post (really!!), since the discussion seems to have reached a point where not much progress is being made, and since I’d like to oblige the commenters who’ve asked me to change the subject.It reminds me of the central tenet of cultural relativism: that there exist no universal standards by which any culture could ever be judged “good” or “bad,” except that Western culture is irredeemably evil.) Matthias Troyer (who, unfortunately, still can’t comment here for embargo reasons) has asked me to clarify that it’s not he, but rather his postdoc Sergei Isakov, who deserves the credit for actually writing the simulated annealing code that outperformed the D-Wave machine on the latter’s own “home turf” (i.e., random QUBO instances with the D-Wave constraint graph).

The quantum Monte Carlo code, which Alex Selby has a detailed new post summarizing his comparisons between the D-Wave device (as reported by Mc Geoch and Wang) and his own solver—finding that his solver can handily outperform the device and speculating about the reasons why.

I haven’t yet had time to read their paper or form an opinion about it, but I’d be very interested if others wanted to weigh in.