Some general responses to "that's not the question": There are different ways to respond to a question; some responses push back on the premise of the question.

Some general responses to "that's not the question": There are different ways to respond to a question; some responses push back on the premise of the question. Some ask about the why behind a question. Both are valuable. A mix of thoughtful responses is the whole idea. There are plenty of places for more constrained styles of discussions, such as any of the topical Stack Exchange web sites. HN is built for open-ended discussion, best I can tell, based on some years of using it. I regularly see comments meander somewhat; discussion takes many forms. Anyhow, I'll try rewriting some of my arguments in a few different ways, in case it helps connect the dots: First, some people have a blanket view regarding regulated industries as 'lesser' opportunities (for starting a company or technical innovation in general). Such a generic belief may lead to the premature dismissal of opportunities. Second, what may appear to be "unregulated" at one point in time may not be a strong signal as to what happens going forward. Third, (and I didn't touch on this in my comment above) it might be useful to think of regulation as one signal that a market area is mature and predictable. (Think of this story: if you want to buy a house, which of the following two choices has more variability? House A in an incorporated city of 100,000 people with known zoning laws and a more-or-less predictable economic and political situation? Or house B at the edge of a sprawling city where an influx of people could lead to dozens of different outcomes? Choosing the best house depends on what outcomes you value and your risk tolerance. With regards to regulation, my point is to say that you can often use regulation to your advantage in choosing a business plan. Fourth, as a general principle, understanding how a range of possible situations affects your objectives is more useful than simply "avoiding regulation". Designing a new method to ingest nicotine that currently sidesteps regulation might work fine until one day it doesn't. You might want to know how regulators might respond to these sorts of situations. Hence my points about history and ethics. These ideas are all connected and relevant. I hope this is of some value to those who seek unregulated (for now) opportunities.