Yes, and if it was only “correct but obvious” that would be a fair point. The issue is in mixing in the “wrong and irrelevant” bits. As I said, the piece is imm

Yes, and if it was only “correct but obvious” that would be a fair point. The issue is in mixing in the “wrong and irrelevant” bits. As I said, the piece is immediately stronger by removing the irrelevant stock market commentary. (And if his view is truly a minority view, it’s hard to believe Gary Marcus style skepticism was responsible for the correction.)