I don't think the article is arguing that no one should pursue hard problems that have economic incentives to be solved, it is saying that when you are a non-ex

I don't think the article is arguing that no one should pursue hard problems that have economic incentives to be solved, it is saying that when you are a non-expert, you should defer to popular opinion. There's nothing stopping people from pursing the hard (yet profitable pursuits), the article mentions people who make their livelihoods in these arenas and does not say they are wasting their time. > He relies on examples that are not falsifiable. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In particular in his stock market example, The article includes an counter-example, and we all know that they exist. People have bet against the market prices and come out ahead. The article is saying that such an event should not attributed to skill.