I wonder how is it useful to moralize about the choices of a very-very few famous and rich people, who are constantly on display in the media. Begins interesti

I wonder how is it useful to moralize about the choices of a very-very few famous and rich people, who are constantly on display in the media. Begins interestingly, but by the end you realize that the good quests given as examples are good in the hindsight, or in the to-be-hindsight if they succeed. In mid-'00s Paul Graham was dismissive of those who worked on neural networks as doing futile job. Nowadays, someone would label that NN work as hard and useful, or hard and evil quest, but definitely not a waste of time. So NNs would jump in the chart of good-bad-hard-easy, which means the estimates are very relative. I guess founders who became investors do also think they're in a good quest, just with their investments.