I kinda doubt anyone's going to really criticize this one.
I mean, the controversy about D-Wave (if I recall correctly) was largely related to claims about it having achieved [quantum advantage over classical computing methods](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_supremacy), along with misunderstandings about what kind of "quantum computer" it is.
However, it's generally accepted that D-Wave is a working computer that uses quantum models; that fact's uncontroversial.
In this paper, they reported using that uncontroversial ability to perform optimization problems to optimize some physics problems. And it worked basically as-expected.
Aaronson is unfortunately in a sunk-cost position when it comes to D-Wave - he's been so against them for so long that even if they start to produce good results his bias is going to make it difficult for him to fairly evaluate them, especially if it means reaching different conclusions about their past work than he did previously.
Probably better to look to other commentators on this one, at least until he has enough time to emotionally process the situation and come around to it. It's not so easy admitting you're wrong in the shtetl.
I mean, the controversy about D-Wave (if I recall correctly) was largely related to claims about it having achieved [quantum advantage over classical computing methods](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_supremacy), along with misunderstandings about what kind of "quantum computer" it is.
However, it's generally accepted that D-Wave is a working computer that uses quantum models; that fact's uncontroversial.
In this paper, they reported using that uncontroversial ability to perform optimization problems to optimize some physics problems. And it worked basically as-expected.