Article titles that consist of "yes/no" question should be legally obligated to include the answer. Though, the vast majority of the time, you can just assume

Article titles that consist of "yes/no" question should be legally obligated to include the answer. Though, the vast majority of the time, you can just assume the answer is "no" and keep scrolling, regardless. Still, such open-ended questions, by their very raising, suggest something occurred that may not have, essentially contributing to misinformation and uncertainty. Without a person expending the time to go to the site and read the post's content, the uncertainty remains, and one may go on thinking "maybe" something happened, that didn't. Considering the article in question is published by "Federation of American Scientists", a group I'd expect to have a high standard of quality and factual precision, I'm surprised they permit such a lazy and irresponsible article title. Actually, I clicked into the article so I can find out who the author is, so I can ask them to revise the article title. Whether they do or not, I figure I might as well contact them, since I already spent so long writing this comment :P BTW, I saw this HN article hours ago and basically just spent all day thinking there was a US nuclear accident at a Dutch air base, because I saw the headline and didn't click through to the article at the time.