What utter tosh!
Maybe my irony radar is switched off but come on!
The SLR form is perfectly braced for hand held shooting, mirrorless with live view is not.
That's before you get under the hood.
For the folk who need WLF's nothing other than a WLF will do, for the folks who need an SLR form, nothing else will do, for the folk who like rangefinders, nothing else will do. Part function, part form, part technology.
Everybody want to kill off DSLRs, yet nobody really wants to buy into mirrorless.
Get your stories straight and stick to them.
Exactly. The OP has wandered deep into tin-foil hat territory. The conspiracy theories about companies taking advantage of customers get to be a little old. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head to buy a camera. Only in government-controlled economies can manufacturers withhold technology or attempt to dictate what the consumer is allowed to buy. And, as can be seen by the collapse of the Soviet Union and China's de-facto turn to capitalism, it doesn't even work very well in government-controlled economies.
Okay, someday we all may move to an alternative form factor that improves on the DSLR. But, let's face it, the current state of mirrorless cameras are little more than electrified versions of 19th century view cameras. The major improvement being that the image is right-side up. Given the current state of development, the ergonomics of mirrorless cameras cannot come close to that of SLRs.
There are reasons why SLRs have been the preferred format of serious photographers for well over 50 years. Just because some technology is declared to be "new" doesn't make it better. DSLRs may eventually be replaced, but that will only happen when something actually better comes along.
Will mirrorless bodies displace SLRs, or will they be the Instamatics of the 21st century? Right now, I would bet on the latter.