For a reasonable rebuttal of her arguments, please take a look at this article on slate [1]. The main argument against her article is that progress in science is not just measured by how many particles you've discovered this year. (disclaimer: former HEP physicist here)

[1] https://slate.com/technology/2019/01/large-hadron-collider-f...

That article is nowhere near a rebuttal of Hossenfelder. It makes a semi-decent case that the LHC was not a failure, which no one is disputing AFAICT. It doesn't even attempt to argue that a new, bigger accelerator is a good idea... unless you count the mere juxtaposition of the hypothetical new accelerator with the non-failure of the LHC, which is a despicable, manipulative form of persuasion.

Then there's this:

> Finding out that there are no particles where we had hoped tells us about the distance between human imagination and the real world.

Which is Not Even Wrong. It sounds like it was generated by a Markov bot trained on quotes from Neil deGrasse Tyson.

See for example https://twitter.com/srrappoccio/status/1087839488557105153