Unlike fusion reactors AI has a pretty convincing "demo" in my opinion.
On a first glance the output of LLMs and image / video generator models is very convincing and the artifacts and mistakes appear "small" for people that don't know much about the technical details. So it's easy to be convinced by "we'll just fix those little bugs and be done in half a year" promises.
EV is a similar story: electric bikes and radio controlled cars and drones work great so it's conceivable that bigger cars and trucks would work too with a "little" battery and motor tweaking.
Nuclear fusion though isn't really tangible yet. For laypeople or seems there is no progress at all. Every now and then some scientists report that they can hold a fusion reaction a little longer or more effective but it's not "tangible". That's probably also holding back a lot of investors which with all their resources mostly still seem to invest based on a gut feeling.
As far as I know fusion energy never got that level of hype and amount of money thrown at it. I mean the research reactors are super expensive but still on another level.
The restaurant I went to prepared the beans with pork fat and anyways refused to change anything about the menu. It wasn't a genuine Mexican restaurant though since I live in Germany. The owners traveled to Mexico often though, got recipes from befriended Mexican chefs and imported some ingredients.
I know that because I used to go there often before I went vegan and was pretty sad that they went basically hostile when I carefully tried to order something vegan.
With carefully I mean without any preaching or judging or super complicated changes and custom wishes.
With local LLMs you can edit the LLMs response to e.g. something really vile and then ask why it would say this. Depending on the model (e.g. Gemma) it apologizes a lot but also promises that it's a bug and people are working on it.
Llama in a psychology role play sometimes doubles down on it and says it said it to get an emotional response and even keeps using some of the vile stuff.
You're correct but besides implementation effort I personally think the web has become too "free" or "rich".
I don't actually like that every website has a slightly or sometimes completely different layout, design philosophy, tech stack etc. Often this freedom is just used to display ads everywhere, track users or to look "on brand" but it's difficult to find the actual content (as user, but also if you want to find it programmatically). With web assembly it's become even more opaque. It's also pretty difficult to do anything dynamic (not a static website) in a secure way. Most of the common frameworks and CMS have a ton of dependencies and almost every one of them can impact safety in a negative way.
Not that I want to get rid of it completely. There are certainly a lot of websites that make good use of the freedom to create a unique and worthwhile experience but for a very very large part of the web (company information, blogs, wikis, forums etc) I'd prefer something much more simple that's more straight to the point.
E.g. personally I was super sad that the usenet died and thought (especially at the beginning) that web forums where a big downgrade. Same with early web chats compared with IRC.
We need to go back to gopher or one of those newer simple protocols. It's just too complex to implement HTML / CSS / JavaScript and all the other stuff correctly from scratch.
The US of Trump isn't a good brand from the outside view. From a European perspective it's an absolute clown show and it's unbelievable how long it's going on and people still taking any of it seriously. I mean the consequences are serious but none of the arguments and things being said. It's obvious nonsense, a lot of people are calling it out but seemingly an equal number of people just tries to spin it into 4D chess moves with even more bullshit.
GrayJay still seems to work