This is a great statistical analysis and it was a pleasure to read, but I wasn't expecting the claims to be so poorly supported.
There's also a reply from one of the Meta authors there, worth checking out.
Or are you referring to the claims from Meta, Google, and Adobe -- which failed to hold up under independent evaluation.
You are also correct that one of the meta authors wrote in a comment. However, he demonstrated a clear lack of understanding regarding what makes the bits "independent" or how to resolve the independence problem.
This.
> However, he demonstrated a clear lack of understanding regarding what makes the bits "independent" or how to resolve the independence problem.
Yes, I didn’t want to call it out explicitly, but this is exactly the kind of thing that would have made my undergraduate statistics professor lose patience.