[TylerE]

Any headline containing the word "bombshell", "destroys", "shocking" or things of that ilk are ALWAYS poorly written fluff, because editors are generally competent.

If there was an actual bombshell that would be the headline!

It wouldn't be "Surprise Computer Science Proof Stuns Mathematicians" it would be "Scientist solves Fermat's Last Theorem" or something

[tines]

I mean, not every big result is FLT. This headline actually tells me, a non-mathematician, much more than something more accurate like "Strong Bounds for 3-Progressions". I have no context for interpreting that phrase at all, but I can appreciate the one chosen (if it's true, which it is).

[permo-w]

this is actually untrue. yes it’s a decent signal of bollocks, but this is a perfectly interesting and well-written article

those headlines and similar clickbait techniques are annoying, but they’re seen as a necessary evil by plenty of “good quality” content creators and editors

this is especially evident on youtube, where it appears as if you literally cannot gain mass success without surprising facial expressions in your video thumbnails

if you think I’m exaggerating, open Youtube in a private tab and see how many of the recommended videos don’t have someone pulling an unusual facial expression in them

plenty of these videos are of perfectly good quality, but in order to succeed they have to follow a shadowy pattern

[zamadatix]

I always thought a set of satirical articles like "Mayor Slams Opponents on Support of Budget Cuts" which then go into said mayor being in custody for assault charges or other similarly overly literal interpretations of the original meaning would be good fun. Well, it probably exists I just haven't seen them yet :).

It's great headlines aren't using the overly technical description (that honestly doesn't help much either) but it is a bit depressing the reason for doing so is "nobody clicks those" not "it could be made clearer to the average person" so we end up with things that are so vague you have no clue what it could actually be about yet is written to ensure it should be interesting enough for you to click. After that they don't really care what you get out of it, you've loaded another article and ads instead of leaving. This article actually bucks the trends a bit by being decent enough with what content is in the body at least.

[Ar-Curunir]

I mean, this is a pretty big result in combinatorics, solving a 70-yr old problem.

[TylerE]

Then the head line should have said “combinatorics” instead of the off-brand Buzzfeed “stuns mathematicians”.