Er, no. Travelling at c, it would take 4.5 years to get to our nearest star. The nearest (known) black hole is V616, 3,000 years of travel away if travelling @ c.
The nearest star is a little over 4 light years away, not 100.
v(t) = at (velocity at time t)
∫v(t)dt = 0.5 a t^2 (distance traveled at time t)
0.5 a t^2 = 0.5 d ==> t = sqrt(d/a) (time to halfway point)
Plugging in d=4.5ly and a=9.81m/s yields 2.07 years to the halfway point, so that's just over 4 years total travel time at 1G.
You'd reach 95% of the speed of light, which would take 4 gigatons of TNT[1] (and 4 more to decelerate) if it's just you and your ship and energy source weight nothing. That's definitely science fiction. 100 years is optimistic.
[0] http://convertalot.com/relativistic_star_ship_calculator.htm...
[1] https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/relativistic-ke?v=v:....
But looks like you forgot about relativity and that starts having a pretty big impact.
For the record, I think your questioning of "what black holes really are" is prudent. The OP article is not prudent, firstly because any of its implications won't be realized for at least 3,000 years. Secondly because our challenge as a society is very much not speculating about this thing Hawking wrote about, and very much is trying to make any of these scenarios useful to us.
Which leads to my fringe opinion that we should try really hard to build a black hole, even if we're worried about it ending us.
"Fuckin' magnets. HOW DO THEY WORK?"
Or maybe it's because he proposed we dedicate our resources to violating the laws of thermodynamics ("free energy"...)
As I understand it, the idea is simply impractical. But there's a huge Tesla fan base among the intersection of conspiracy theorists and amateur (pseudo)scientists who believe that Tesla's idea was scuttled and suppressed by Big Electric to protect their monopoly on generating electricity in harder ways.