For all browser targets to die, people must no longer be interested in writing Haskell while writing webapps, even though people will probably remain interested in writing Haskell, and probably remain writing webapps, which seems unlikely. For the WASM target to die and the JS target to remain, this would have to mean that there is some technical barrier that makes the maintenance burden not worth the staggering performance gain, and if there is some such burden I am not aware of it. 'Java died so WASM will die because both are VMs' is basically a content-free dismissal - what do you actually think will no longer be needed, or is currently not needed but overvalued, and why?

Yet we are talking about targeting the server in this thread, because so far the tooling for the browser sucks, and VCs are more willing to sponsor startups selling server products.

Java not only is pretty much alive on the server, so is .NET, Erlang, and plenty of compiled languages that have always been a better alternative to JavaScript.

I am comparing your words about WASM to your words about JS. Misdirections about VCs are irrelevant. You can expect the WASM target to have as great or greater longevity than the JS target, and if your prediction about future failure isn't true of JS then it won't be true of WASM.

WASM on the server isn't the same as JS on the browser.

And that surely has something to do with the price of tea in China. WASM on the client is why you mentioned JS.