Great introduction for anyone (such as myself) who found themselves quickly lost in most of the other posted discussions. Not only do you get a general idea of the proof, you feel better equipped to look back over those higher-level discussions.
This was originally posted on an undergrad mailing list at Tech. It helped me understand the the P≠NP paper better, so I asked the author to make a page for it.
> For example, the problem of determining whether a graph has a Hamiltonian cycle is in NP; given a path in the graph, it is fast to verify whether or not it is a Hamiltonian cycle.<p>Submitter is a bit out of touch with reality if he thinks "Non-Mathematicians" will get that example. Nice read overall though.