Technology

No chance I could lift a CRT enough times over and over to beat someone to death with it.

Absolutely, in the beginning there were pros and cons, with the cheap TN-LCD having serious annoying display issues.
But with better LCD technologies like IPS arriving and improving fast together with lower prices, there is no doubt that today even a cheap IPS display is way better than any CRT can ever be. With better clarity, colors and black, and even less ghosting, because CRT definitely has ghosting too.
Back in the day my Sony 29" CRT TV weighed about 60 kg without speakers. (the speakers could be detached).
And the CRT weight increases exponentially with size, because with bigger screen the glass needs to be thicker to withstand the significant pressure of the vacuum in the tube.
So a 60" TV CRT would most likely weigh above 250 kg!! The tube alone would be more expensive to make than an entire modern TV of similar size!
But more than that, it would be very difficult to make a 60" CRT screen that doesn't flicker, and the extreme speed needed for the ray to cross the entire screen, would require enormous power to light the phosphorous surface, within the nanosecond time it has for each pixel. Even just normal HD 1980x1024 at 60 frames per second and 3 RGB subpixels per pixel, is 364.953.600 sub pixels per second, so an analogue signal that needs to control the cathode ray at that speed would require enormous power.

The result would be a 200kg+ TV with smeared/blurry images and very poor color quality, due to the inherent imprecision. and even with clever tricks to make the tubes slimmer, developed near the end of CRT popularity, it would require almost a meter distance from the wall, to make room for the huge cathode ray tube.

There is no way CRT is making a comeback, CRT is inferior in every way, for every size of display, and also in blackness, contrary to what he claims in the article.

Edit PS:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_PVM-4300
The biggest CRT ever made was 43" and weighed 199.6 kg (440 lb).
So a 60" would weigh way above 250 kg.
Also notice that even this prestige project by Sony, does NOT have a black screen, so the idea of perfect blacks on CRT as the article claims are pure idiocy.

and have terrible resolution

Now-now. With CRTs resolution is not an inherent trait anyway. You could trade off update frequency for better resolution and back.

They’re heavy, waste tons of space, guzzle power,

When CRTs were common, LCD displays also were heavy, wasted tons of space and guzzled power. And for some time after that they were crap for your eyes.

Even the best CRT ever made is absolutely destroyed by the worst of modern LCDs.

No, the best CRT ever made is really not that, but also costs like an airplane's wing.

Well, that and the resolution was so garbage they had a natural form of antialiasing, but that’s a really optimistic way of saying they were blurry as shit.

An LCD display has resolution as its trait. A CRT display has a range of resolutions realistically usable with it. It doesn't have a matrix of pixels, only a surface at which particles are shot.

So, the point before I forget it. While CRTs as they existed are a thing of the past, it would be cool to have some sort of optical displays based on interference (suppose, two lasers at the sides of the screen) or whatever, allowing similarly agile resolution change, and also more energy-efficient than LCDs, and also better for one's eyes. I think there even are some, just very expensive. Removing the "one bad pixel" component would do wonders. Also this could probably be a better technology for foldable displays. As in - now you scratch a screen, you have to replace the matrix. While such a component wouldn't cost as much a whole matrix, the lasers would be the expensive part.

Anyway, just dreaming.

I can, unfortunately. My younger brother bought a small CRT a couple of months ago because he's getting into retro gaming. He hardly touches the thing, but I can hear it across the apartment whenever he turns the damn thing on.

Counterpoint: DEGAUSS

Bwoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyoyonnnnnggggghhhhh.... CLONK

Honestly surprised nobody has tried to sell some bolt on diffusing/screen mask for this reason

The look of CRT is important to retro gaming but do you know what the most important characteristic of CRTs for retro gaming is?

No input lag.

Play OG Super Mario Bros on a modern TV and let me know how long it is before you wanna smash the controller in frustration. The game just feels incredibly sloppy.

I hated it when Windows 95 or 98 reset the refresh rate to 59Hz. Flicker was obnoxious.

most crts i've ever used were 75Hz or more

I prefer nuclear wessels.

But seriously, if you had read the article you would understand how it would potentially be done.

Ironically, the light gun segments are doable with the gamepad and actually easier that way. I always used the gamepad to beat them instead of the zapper.