Reading Lipton's description of this paper I think I understand how normal people feel when they listen to geeks talk about technology.

The paper is rather complicated, you can see it here http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Vinay_Deolalikar/#s.p. on the author's site.

it would be nice to believe this is solved, but my gut instinct is that it will not be vetted.

This was also good the last three times today it appeared on HN. :)

In all fairness, this is an article by someone who knows his stuff saying maybe. There's so many crackpots going after P ≠ NP that we need to hear from those people saying this time is different. The news to this article isn't that a claimed proof exists, but that R. J. Lipton is saying it seems plausible.

Yeah - I updated the post title to make that a bit more clear.

The reason I posted a link regarding the same topic again is because this is a link to a blog post by a respected complexity theorist which actually discusses the proof albeit cursorily.