News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on ITER fusion energy pushed back beyond 2050. Parent comment

Re:ITER fusion energy pushed back beyond 2050 by dang on Wednesday July 19, 2017 @03:02AM (#14802462)
Ok we added "ITER" at the beginning. If someone suggests a better (more accurate and neutral) title we can change it again.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ITER fusion energy pushed back beyond 2050 by abefetterman on Wednesday July 19, 2017 @02:00PM (#14806402)
More descriptive is Tokamak rather than ITER, since ITER is still going to have burning DT plasma in 2035 (at the earliest, according to article).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ITER fusion energy pushed back beyond 2050 by dang on Wednesday July 19, 2017 @02:11PM (#14806489)
So it should say "Tokamak fusion energy pushed back beyond 2050"? I'm worried that this will provoke more objections. The combo of highly technical + controversial makes it hard to get a title like this right.
[ Parent | on HN ]