This critique seems very reasonable and accessible. So I'm puzzled how the caliber of people like mentioned in the article, who are technologists and familiar with physics, can get on board with the kind of investments they are getting. What do they know that we don't? At least in the case of Theranos the investors were not technical.

The guy did a much longer Q&A livestream afterwards and he did slightly roll back his critique. He admitted there were some advantages of Helion's approach even if he still doesn't think it is overrall the best way forwards.

The Q&A mentioned is likely this [0]. Do you have any hints which section would cover the upsides?

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK5v1Nw98xs

Thanks great video describing the neutron production issues and the cross-section issues of their fuel choice.

Thanks for the link! The rebuttal sounds very reasonable. I doubt the Real Engineering guy has much expertise in that area and just mostly went for the views and fusion hype.