&gt;&gt; Sounds very click-baity.<p>Oh dear. Not again :) [Edit: by that I mean that I had another sumbission in the same day that readers considered had a clickbaity title]<p>I guess I could have changed the title to &quot;NP Complete problem tackled with parallel computation using biological motors&quot; or something similar- that would have been more informative and less of a strong claim. But the submission guidelines also say to avoid changing the title (unless it&#x27;s clickbaity) so in some case you just have to make a judgment.<p>I think in this case the title is a bit ambiguous. You could read it as &quot;NP complete problem class solved&quot; or &quot;NP complete problem instance solved&quot;. But I think the author makes a good job of detailing the result, they do link back to the original paper and there&#x27;s plenty more to the article than just a catchy title. Also it&#x27;s on Ars, that generally has a good record of not trying to pull the wool over their readers&#x27; eyes. So really, I didn&#x27;t think it would be read as an attempt at generating an undeserved er, buzz.<p>So I erred on the side of keeping the title as it was.<p>Well, anyway- this was a bit unexpected (two titles read as clickbaity in one day) so I&#x27;m a bit worried now- I don&#x27;t want to come across as a ... clickbaiter? I&#x27;ll err on the side of caution on the next few submissions and see what happens.