The existence of stars already did. This is more like "it's plausible to do so in a reactor that won't destroy itself". The "that won't destroy itself" part is what this demonstrates, but annoyingly reporting often shortens it to the "is plausible to do so" part.

Except... correct me if I'm wrong here... The "reactor" did destroy itself.

> The fuel and canister get vaporized within a few billionths of a second during the experiment. Researchers then hope their equipment survived the heat and accurately measured the energy released by the fusion reaction.

It didn't necessarily blow up like a fusion bomb, but the energy was hardly produced in any sort of sustainable, ongoing form that we can harvest.

Worse - it's not even just the chamber that essentially destroys itself - the lasers that create the event also damage themselves: https://lasers.llnl.gov/news/controlling-backscatter-damage-...

I think he meant _useful_ energy. Is it so surprising that HN is primarily interested about civilian applications and cynical when none are in foreseeable future?

Yeah, I really meant in a controlled reaction situation. Should have been more clear.