> I was calling you out on the worlds most obvious straw man. Would you rather I just call you a liar, instead? I'd rather you not call me anything. As I said,

> I was calling you out on the worlds most obvious straw man. Would you rather I just call you a liar, instead? I'd rather you not call me anything. As I said, it doesn't matter who I am. That's not the issue I'm interested in. Likewise, I have not called you any names--I care only about the arguments you make. > in the real world, we theorycraft before we invest using that miracle of nature, our ability to model and predict the future in our heads. That is my point. If we only invest in making anything we can predict will succeed, and avoid potential failures, a device like a smartphone would not have existed, because I was there when companies like Apple tried to launch PDAs like the Newton, and the world did not care. Based on prediction, smartphones would not gain traction in the consumer market. And yet, the iPhone made that happen Same for iPods--"Hundreds of dollars for a music player? Everyone would get a $30 sony". It was only with a lot of conviction pushing a "theoretically blank" idea, that the smartphone industry became what it is today. If we only invest in things that seem "not dumb" in "theorycraft", a lot of the successful startups today would not exist. Success requires experimenting on things that may not seem obvious at first. > Amaze me. 1. I don't need to amaze you. You as an individual are not that important. This is especially true if you are the type of person who sits and waits to be amazed. The most important people in the world go out and amaze others, as opposed to waiting to be amazed by others 2. Ideas are not dumb until they are proven good. They are ideas until proven wrong. You don't get to dismiss an idea with near-certainty that they are "dumb", until you've actually tried it out yourself and can prove that it doesn't work. > I'm willing to be shown wrong That is not true. Someone who is willing to be shown wrong, would encourage others to try new ideas, even ones that are not apparent successes "in theory", or "dumb" From the conversation so far, it sounds like you are not supportive of investing in ideas that are not proven in theorycraft. Based on the conversation alone, and the trust you put in theorycraft, it does not look like you want to be proven wrong.