[sb1752]

There's a long history of fraud and misleading / sensational claims made my companies in the fusion space. The industry is nowhere near break-even (total energy into system == total energy out). ITER is a great example today. This is covered well with in-depth research by journalist Steven B. Krivit. He's put together a documentary exposing ITER's many false and dubious claims that I recommend watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnikAFWDhNw&t=8s

[lambdatronics]

There are two different definitions of breakeven, and science journalism is usually not good at making those distinct (and yeah, often the press releases from the institutions don't help). "Scientific" breakeven is the first milestone we'll hit, and that's what NIF is claiming to be close to. You're referring to what's known as "engineering" breakeven, which is harder to achieve and requires yet higher fusion yields. Unless you hear otherwise, assume that anyone talking about breakeven means "scientific" breakeven -- if they'd achieved "engineering" breakeven, they'd make sure to spell that out!