Hossenfelder has a lot of... unique takes in the physics world, I don't think she should be used as a general barometer of the field.
Not seeing something when we "expect" to not see anything (from the perspective of certain models) might be more boring, but it's definitely not a "waste" (again speaking purely from a physicist's standpoint).
We know the standard model is incomplete, but where and how are not well known. Not seeing evidence for new physics rules out certain models, and places upper/lower limits on others. It's progress either way.
They keep building bigger machines to fill out the parts that don't have a definition yet.
Anything that specifies what happens at the next band of energy levels is a success, whether it yields new particles, or rules them out at that energy level.
There's some destination of approaching the most energy dense states like describing the mechanics that were active during the big bang period