> Bringing a product to market isn't innovation in the way developing something new is. I think this is where we disagree. I view the technology of production

> Bringing a product to market isn't innovation in the way developing something new is. I think this is where we disagree. I view the technology of production as equally (but not more) important to the success of a new product -- where success means, "in the hands of as many people as possible". I have a poor view of the importance (and therefore value) of inventions that never reach their markets. Dean Kamen is a great example here; he's an inarguably brilliant man who's developed new technology in a stunning number of fields -- a far better inventor than Musk -- but Deka, the company, consistently struggles to get the technologies to market, so Musk is having a far greater impact on humanity. > Intel heavily relies on trade secrets to ensure that its competitors don't have access to its fabrication technology. And I read this part as supporting that point. Intel's processor technology is certainly valuable, but to Intel, its production technology is even more valuable. I don't know how to ensure that inventors are treated fairly. Perhaps this is one of those things that requires a cultural shift, where inventors begin to realize that an invention without accompanying developments in production technology is not worth very much. That's why I'm excited by what Tesla is doing. I hope that this is another step in that direction.