Paul Budnik firstname.lastname@example.org
This is the most popular of interpretations. It recognizes that the important content of QM is the mathematical models and the ability to apply those models to real experiments. As long as we understand the models and their application we do not need an interpretation.
Advocates of this position like to argue that the existing framework allows us to solve all real problems and that is all that is important. Franson's analysis of Aspect's experiment [Note 1] shows this is not entirely true. Because there is no objective criterion in QM for determining when a measurement is complete (and hence irreversible) there is no objective criterion for measuring the delays in a test of Bell's inequality. If the demise of Schrodinger's cat may not be determined until someone looks in the box (see item 2) how are we to know when a measurement in tests of Bells inequality is irreversible and thus measure the critical timing in these experiments?
 J. D. Franson, Bell's Theorem and delayed determinism, Physical Review D, 31, 2529-2532, (1985).