Transistors? Computers before them used vacuum tubes. In 1943 Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, said, "I think there's a world market for maybe five computers." Now, it would be easy for us to laugh at him, thanks to us being almost 80 years in the future, but on the topic of "what does the future hold for us", put yourself in Watson's place. You're reasonably smart and knowledgeable, and understand what goes into a computer, and thus you'd make the same claim.

Fusion is similarly incomprehensible to us here and now. There are untold advancements in materials sciences and engineering technologies that need to happen before it's possible so we have to invest in trying to so we can make those advancements in order to make it possible.

Just 75 years after Thomas Watson said that, we were already doing EUV lithography, a process whose description and commercial incentives would have been totally incomprehensible to him:

"In our laser-produced plasma (LPP) source, molten tin droplets of around 25 microns in diameter are ejected from a generator at 70 meters per second. As they fall, the droplets are hit first by a low-intensity laser pulse that flattens them into a pancake shape. Then a more powerful laser pulse vaporizes the flattened droplet to create a plasma that emits EUV light. To produce enough light to manufacture microchips, this process is repeated 50,000 times every second."

https://www.asml.com/en/technology/lithography-principles/li...

Transistors, microchips and lasers were not invented yet in 1943. How would one even guess that it could soon be a viable business to build a giant machine that shoots molten tin droplets at 50,000 Hz to produce a particular bandwidth of light so that you could create billions of tiny computers out of sand?

Hopefully fusion is on a similar path where the description of 2100's commercial reactor will sound similarly incomprehensible to us.

Thomas Watson's quote is misrepresented and it is more prescient than it appears. There are indeed maybe five computers on the world market: the BlackRock computer [1], the Google computer, the Tencent computer, and maybe a few others. A computer can be implemented in one CPU, or in millions of CPUs: if the control and the data ownership behind the CPUs is the same, it is still one computer. Watson's quote is more about psychology rather than technology, just look at the hullabaloo of crypto: a theoretically decentralized technology and the people still use centralized exchanges.

In the extreme you could say that today we have only one computer, the ASML computer [2], since they are the only ones making the machine that makes the machine.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aladdin_(BlackRock)

[2] ASML: TSMC's Critical Supplier, Explained https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFsn1CUyXWs

> Watson's quote is more about psychology rather than technology, just look at the hullabaloo of crypto: a theoretically decentralized technology and the people still use centralized exchanges.

Well, that's easy. I forgot who mentioned it, but crypto has 0 support for actual clients, and the vast majority of day-to-day computing now happens on mobile end user devices (phones, tablets, laptops). So besides (what should be) this fatal flaw, the second thing crypto requires you is to manage your keys SUPER carefully yourself or a server.

Nobody[1]'s going to do that. I'm a techie and I don't want to maintain my own servers. What hope does Joe Locksmith have?

So in practice crypto will always centralize.

[1] 99% of the population.