So basically, you all looked at the surface. I can imagine some think I'm trivializing or dismissing.
There's a time for every founder where they know that the product concept is deductively right but empirically wrong. There's so much uncertainty around delivering the model to reality.
Not all things proceed from the deductively true stage, where you feel like it makes no sense to give up, to the empirically true stage. Some founders know, and I imagine they are a little bit haunted.
From the trenches, watching your body decay and hoping you can get enough empirical progress to do smart things instead of reluctantly necessary things, you just want punch anyone who has some sage wisdom to re-peddle for the 37th time. Truth, you'd like to offer decent engineers stock that you think is worth billions of dollars, but until and if it ever becomes empirically true, you just suffer and persist while people trade PG articles like cake recipes you can just follow.
This is a moment. I am tactically surrounded on all sides. The only viable option is to make a swift and decisive attack in one direction that breaks through the encirclement and reconfigures the situation. I can't win everywhere, so I have to win somewhere.
