And then you read the abstract and realize that this is an improvement of an earlier result using five polygons (which in turn built on a history of earlier results).

So, still a great result, but not as out there as one may think.

I think it's also worth pointing out that in theoretical CS and most of math, it is common to list authors alphabetically. I don't think we have a way of knowing the relative contribution of the two authors. Demaine is obviously accomplished, but I find the kind of hero worship found in this thread distasteful and the facts don't support it here. Give credit to Langerman; Demaine surely would!