Moving forward and developing an idea that no one wants is definitely a problem. Testing is a decent way to rectify this problem. However, I think that the un

Moving forward and developing an idea that no one wants is definitely a problem. Testing is a decent way to rectify this problem. However, I think that the underlying problem is that people are coming up with bad ideas in the first place. No amount of testing and iterating is going to save someone who is incapable of putting themselves inside the minds of the consumers and knowing in a big pictures sense what it is that they want. And even if testing does lead you to better understanding of your consumers, that doesn't change the fact that it isn't always proper. It's a case by case basis. Sometimes you are confident that you know what they want, and testing would take time away from other things. You seem to be arguing that in the aggregate, it would be useful if people of certain "humilities" tested more. That's probably true, but my two points are: 1) they'd be better off solving the underlying problem of their abilities to know what people want. (this is a good starting point for learning - http://www.paulgraham.com/startupideas.html http://www.paulgraham.com/startupideas.html) 2) you shouldn't make decisions based on the aggregate population. you have more information, and you can decide whether or not testing is appropriate based on your personal situation.