> I don't see how that can be interpreted that way in context. It's not an interpretation...chromatic suggested Redefine "innovation" as "generate money for VC

> I don't see how that can be interpreted that way in context. It's not an interpretation...chromatic suggested Redefine "innovation" as "generate money for VCs" and you apparently agree with that as a possible (though delusional) definition by the user you quoted - I disagree with that quote as attempting to define innovation. Let's replace the word innovation with chromatic's definition in what you quoted: "[generating money for VCs] is a vehicle for the creation of wealth. [generating money for VCs] is in and of itself fairly worthless. The only reason the concept of [generating money for VCs] is so popular is because of the value (and the valuations) we put on companies who are seen to be [generating money for VCs]" I do agree with you defining innovation as generating money for VCs is delusional, I just disagree with what you quoted as an attempt to define innovation.