

Scott Aaronson explains his $200k bet (8 Signs A Claimed P≠NP Proof Is Wrong) - kam
http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=458

======
jballanc
This is actually a really great explanation and, perhaps more importantly, a
really great example of how science and other academic pursuits really work.
Personally, I study computational biochemistry and a lot of work appears on
the arXiv long before the official publications. So, I try to keep up with the
arXiv, but as this is all non-peer-reviewed I have a similar checklist that I
use before spending more time going into the details of the paper.

That's not to say that this paper should have been disregarded out of hand.
There's a difference between a crackpot and a honest good attempt that
deserves further scrutiny. Still, with the number of papers that get published
these days, having a list like this is a valuable tool.

------
Tycho
Point 8 seems a bit unfair - the proof author's comments to me seemed to be
'confirmations of receipt' have started arriving (not confirmations of
validation) and 'as you know this problem has philosophical ramifications'
(not 'I have forever changed the philosophical landscape'). Otherwise seems
like a neat article, maybe I should memorize the other points, could come in
handy at dinner parties (cause I, like a lot of other people over the last
week, don't know wtf any of this mathematical stuff really means).

~~~
edanm
I'm not sure if the entire checklist was meant to apply to this specific
instance. Mainly since that point also didn't seem right to me.

------
jarsj
Author has posted a new synopsis (which answers the first objection raised by
Scott and perhaps more) and claims to put out a version addressing the issues
raised in 3-4 days. <http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Vinay_Deolalikar/>

~~~
DougBTX
I'd be happy for him to take his time, and release an update in 3-4 months.

~~~
jarsj
Yes this is probably getting too much hectic for him. Handling PR is not
something he is expected to be good at.

~~~
jrockway
Indeed. He just needs to say, "dear world. the paper you have been reading was
unfinished and was leaked without my permission. please disregard it until i
release a version that is sane. kthx, bye."

------
robryan
One good thing this whole paper and debate has done is motivated to get my
honours thesis done, mine obviously is nowhere near as profound but it is
great to watch people on the edge of advancement in the field attempt to give
us new understanding.

------
jcsalterego
_But reading the overview felt like reading Joseph Conrad’s _Heart of
Darkness_: I’d reread the same paragraph over and over, because the words
would evaporate before they could stick to my brain._

shudder

~~~
jrockway
I think you mean, "The horror! The horror!"

~~~
jcsalterego
Well played, jrockway. Well played.

------
itistoday
The nerds with only a cursory interest in the problem are awed.

~~~
itistoday
The nerds lack all sense of humor.

~~~
CrazedGeek
Eh, it wasn't really funny.

~~~
itistoday
Nor was it meant to be 'really' funny. It was just an observation, one that I
think is fairly accurate. I'd never seen an article on the HN frontpage with
so many upvotes (for so long) and zero comments.

By lack of humor, I meant an inability to take one's self less seriously.

~~~
cousin_it
Well, at least we can take _you_ less seriously.

