Thanks for the in depth reply. As for Edison: what if I spend my perspiration (all 99% of it) on working on the idea? I agree wholeheartedly with his eval of ge

Thanks for the in depth reply. As for Edison: what if I spend my perspiration (all 99% of it) on working on the idea? I agree wholeheartedly with his eval of genius in that only 1% of the work is inspired. The rest comes from knowledge and hard work and experience. I want people to evaluate my ideas (maybe) but I don't want them to do the shit-work. Most of my ideas are formed enough that I know the resources that will be needed, and I've been in business long enough to do the market research and think about whether or not the idea could be viable. But some of the ideas are "pure" ideas. Not products, or software or services. (BTW I am with you on all the forge-hub syndrome) The math deficiency for me is a problem in that I have missed out on some basics somewhere, and I have been forever trying to catch up to them. I think maybe I am the opposite of what you described, because I couldn't really get the concepts of math, but I could solve the problems, but only through my own convoluted, invented version of math I devised. This has hurt me a more than a few ways: one through school, where i would get the right answer on tests, but in showing my workings, the teacher would be thinking "WTF?!?" secondly, when trying to work through something like Knuth's TAOCP, the math would hold me back, because I can't understand what he wants me to understand. And I know that it is important not to just solve the problems, but to understand why they are solved that way. It's a shame your 'skill' kept you out of academia. Maybe someone can pass for them, but no 'faker' can contribute what the good PhDs have to knowledge. (And no fake PhD has contributed what smart 'uneducated' people have over the millenia) Now get back to making your idea real, and thanks for the input.