After reading: http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2012/04/lawrencekrauss.html
Thanks! You're right: entertaining and enlightening. I am comforted that I'm not the only one to notice this conundrum has yet to be solved. The most enlightening bit is after Krauss has explained how really nothing his nothing is, one of the reviewers says (in effect), "If something came from it, then it wasn't nothing, was it?" If nothingness is "elevated" to somethingness by having had some thing come from it, then we can never have something come from nothing, by definition. Maybe there simply cannot be nothing. Maybe nothing is an eminently unstable state---silent, pristine emptiness "decaying" into something almost immediately. Maybe Nothingness isn't the primordial base state we've always taken it to be. Maybe it's a corner case, an outlier. Krauss's book is not uninteresting or even wrong, it's just mis-titled.
We should call it "Nothing From Something for a Fleeting Femtosecond, Then Back to Work!"