I don't have a subscription to Physics Today (no loss there), but an article was published with the title:
"Ignition effort may be slowed as Livermore facility misses milestone", David Kramer, October 2012, page 28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.1747 As one would expect from a mainstream rag, the title downplays the problems. However, a quick search on the web led me to this article in August which doesn't mince words: http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Livermore-Lab-Ignition-Facility-s-woes -3797461.php Contrast the wording in the mainstream press, "may be slowed", with the statements from the sfgate article, "a new report by the U.S. Department of Energy, which oversees the Livermore lab, now concludes that the probability that National Ignition Facility leaders can meet this deadline [end of 2012] is "extremely low." And this one, "A second report from the National Ignition Facility's own technical review committee warns that deadlines for such complex experimental efforts are 'unrealistic' because the project is working in a realm filled with many scientific unknowns." Like nearly all venues of reporting, even scientific news is subject to its own slant, agenda, and half-truths. Fortunately due to the internet, one can quickly and easily search for and read opposing viewpoints to become better informed. -Mark Iverson
