Looks to me like the authors are lamenting the lack of society's resources devoted to enabling the pursuit of innovation for those intellectually capable whose

Looks to me like the authors are lamenting the lack of society's resources devoted to enabling the pursuit of innovation for those intellectually capable whose personal resources fall below the level needed for unbroken progress toward achievement of patents. And that's a very high level now arrived at seemingly decently with the data they had to work with. The paper is fascinating but to me it just confirms what should have been obvious to any natural innovator since childhood. Once I found out about Edison (and patents) I didn't see much purpose in patents until after I would happen to have solid support for my efforts to begin with. Employers and others have made millions due to my innovations, but that was not truly solid support as long as I am still tasked with diverting so much of my time and effort to survival activites. If I had patented some of my most promising inventions they would have expired by now anyway, as it is I can maintain readiness indefinitely. It takes a great individual to overcome the kind of adversity that Edison did, and somebody like that does not come along every day, so I am with WalterBright on this one.