[offbytwo]

> cannot be used to infer any sort of near-time

It's not meant to, it's meant to dispel the common notion that no progress is being made in this area of research.

And the total power output doesn't need to remain exponential for fusion to be viable, we just need a way to sustain fusion reactions for a long enough period of time (china recently set a record with 101 seconds).

Seriously look into all the work being done on this currently by Government projects and private companies. I'm not saying it'll happen soon but significant progress has indeed been happening for a long time, and is only picking up pace as time goes on. As I said, this is likely the most difficult thing humans have ever attempted.

https://www.iter.org/sci/BeyondITER

[eesmith]

But the quip that "fusion is always 10 years away" is not an expression that no progress is being made. Rather, it's an expression that the most optimistic views for fusion are always for at least 10 years in future, and as we get more understanding of the difficulty, that horizon always stays 10 years away.

I've been following fusion from the sidelines since I first read about it in SciAm in the 1980s.

I think that understanding how the human body (or any complex biological system) works is a more complex project.