Comment by atzeus

This is very much a theoretical result. The author quotes a redditor or who jokes that the previous bound was nice and round and that was of practical importance:

>The result is of extreme practical importance. Not for actually multiplying integers (as usual with these algorithms it’s probably not faster than existing algorithms for integers that can be stored in the observable universe), but for writing papers. It has always been a hassle to write down the complexity of integer multiplication or algorithms based on integer multiplication by introducing soft-O notation, little-o exponents, epsilons greater than 0, or iterated logarithms. From now on I can just write O(n log n) in my papers and be done with it!

This new result means painful typesetting again.