All of this is driven by HTS. Fusion reactors (generically) scale to the inverse^4 of magnetic field strength. HTS doubled the achievable magnetic field strength of electromagnets, which means that ITER-like performance can be achieved in university-scale reactors at comercially-viable, lower costs.
Dr. Dennis Whyte (MIT Nuclear Eng Prof) gave a great seminar at Berkeley that covered some technical nuances. It's mandatory watching if you want to geek out and understand the fusion hype: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY6U4wB-oYM
Are they going to upgrade it or it’s already obsolete before it was even finished?
Source : I generally don't believe VC-backup startups anymore, but that says more about me than about them (thankfully, sometimes they do stuff, like, 140 chars and useful tools for Russian trolls.)
But let's see how it goes !
I can completely imagine that it goes through stages like
Half a century of painful research at universities -> decades to build multiple prototypes -> years to build a POC -> decades to industrialize the POC -> years to connect the POC to the grid -> ???? -> light bulb moment -> ???? -> profit
I'm not sure we much further than the beginning of step 2. Indeed, (sorry to say that), I'd trust an MIT startup to do that more than a YC startup. But real life will serve as evidence.
2025 -> Post on HN
2028 -> Q>1 achieved (by you ? by someone else ?)
CFS plans Q>1 for 2027 with a tokamak design. If they succeed then there will be plenty of VC for similar designs. I'd place my bets that CFS succeeds with Q>1. And I think the real problem will be the energy flux and neutron handling and thus much more a material sciences problem than a plasma physics problem. Thus the idea to look for a niche that has lower power needs is a very clever one. My bet would be rather on Maritime Fusion than Helion. But nevertheless, CFS will be likely first at Q>1 however there is always space for another competitor.