On 1/14/2016 1:28 AM, Robert Green wrote:
I.e., how much of a pipe dream *is* this?

You expect a reporter for the Telegraph to make that judgement?

Nope. Probably a "general assignment" reporter whose next piece will be on
the oldest living English veteran or what someone dug up under a parking lot
(recently it was the maligned and malformed Richard III).

Exactly. A fluff piece.

The role of a reporter is to ask the questions his/her *readers* would
ask -- not to simply pass "press releases" on to the public. To sort
out a realistic way of explaining the issue(s) to the readership.
Then, to identify the challenges remaining and likelihood of those
challenges being overcome (e.g., some are NOT solely "funding issues"
but have technical problems that make the solutions impractical;
romm temperature superconductors??)

You can bet your *ss the *researcher* has already thought of these
questions as he's, no doubt, asked them, himself. And, is probably the
*most* OPTIMISTIC of a discovery's/invention's potential. Even a
naive journalist should be able to ask: "So, how much will it cost?"
and "When will we see this being used?" Answers like "it *may*
EVENTUALLY be cheaper than current alternatives" should prompt
"then why can't we have it TODAY?"

Give an interested 8 year old the "microphone" and he'll NATURALLY ask the
questions that the readership is *thinking*.

If you look at these sorts of reports, historically, they are little more
than pipe dreams (where's my rollable OLED TV/phone/display? "cold fusion"?)

Nowadays there's always a strong possibility that the article is a hoax
cribbed from a growing number of sites dedicated to falsifying news reports.

Or, just filler for an advertisement (space/slot) they couldn't sell...