Thanks, that actually looks interesting.

The MIT press office has a habit of writing press releases that go beyond the usual hype to be so over-the-top they actually make the work sound crackpot. Happens most often in AI, but I guess in crypto now too. Not the scientists' fault, so I usually try to read the original paper to see their own claims, and invariably they are much more specific and legitimate.

I think it's not just MIT's press office, but every single one that I've seen. Or maybe there's a selection effect; the more sensational the particular article, the more people see it, so it just seems that all press offices are off their rocker.

This would fit better as a comment for the original submission

Agreed. I have mostly stopped reading MIT Technology Review articles for this reason, and this article showed the same problem with hype and lack of context.