3 ms·
(I’m not sure if there’s an established name for this but) What you’re doing isn’t just calling the concept idiotic, but assuming that a whole chain of people i
by mft_ 2y ago
(I’m not sure if there’s an established name for this but) What you’re doing isn’t just calling the concept idiotic, but assuming that a whole chain of people involved —presumably including domain specialists, financiers, banks, whoever— are also idiots. And assuming that you (who I assume have thought about this topic for about the two minutes it took to write your post, as otherwise you’d probably have declared the source of your wisdom) know better than all of those people.
So you’re probably wrong.
For clarity I’m not suggesting that the concept does make sense; but there are probably reasons to believe that it might make sense, if implemented properly.
- Ekaros 2y agoI can see entirely stupid ideas being build and getting some investment. Those who build it are happy to have a job even if product is questionable. And those doing funding have hopes they can extract value for themselves or flip it before it fails. There is enough people that are just happy getting paid or extracting their cut from some part of process... And then there is the dreamers, aka idiots who evangelise.
- nradov 2y agoNah. Every ambitious indoor or vertical farming startup so far has failed, or is in the process of failing. Looks like @ahartmetz has it right and those "specialists" really were idiots. It's amazing that investors would put money into this space without seeing some evidence that costs could eventually be reduced with scale. Just another consequence of zero interest rates, I guess.