The US National Ignition Facility has achieved even higher energy yields since breaking even for the first time in 2022, but a practical fusion reactor is still a long way off
Why have we accepted the standard of misleading headlines? “Oh well you didn’t read the article, I guess you and 90% of eyeballs get to be fundamentally misinformed” is an unhinged take.
I never said a misleading headline was acceptable. I said the publication is not misleading and that it covers the criticisms dude up above was leveling.
You didn’t say it, but when someone else did you became extremely pedantic, “corrected them” to maintain your perceived moral high ground, and straight up invented a strawman to not have to discuss it.
When you think looking at someone’s comment history is valid as an argument lmao. Just add ad hominem to the list. Or are you going to climb on a second high horse and say I don’t know what that is either? You’re a clown.
Why have we accepted the standard of misleading headlines? “Oh well you didn’t read the article, I guess you and 90% of eyeballs get to be fundamentally misinformed” is an unhinged take.
I never said a misleading headline was acceptable. I said the publication is not misleading and that it covers the criticisms dude up above was leveling.
It is misleading, for someone to be misleading they must mislead, and the headline misleads.
You didn’t say it, but when someone else did you became extremely pedantic, “corrected them” to maintain your perceived moral high ground, and straight up invented a strawman to not have to discuss it.
So you basically did say it.
Go ahead and quote that strawman for me
Your entire comment is about correcting OP. None of it addresses the headline. That’s a strawman.
This one? Where I say the publication is not misleading, only the headline? You don’t understand what a strawman is.
Your comment history indicates you’re pervasively angry about little things like this. What’s up with that?
When you think looking at someone’s comment history is valid as an argument lmao. Just add ad hominem to the list. Or are you going to climb on a second high horse and say I don’t know what that is either? You’re a clown.
So angry
The headline is part of the publication though.
No, this is a popular science article, not an actual publication.