This is such selective hindsight, though. We remember the small minority of products that persisted and got better. We don't remember the majority of ones that fizzled out after the novelty wore off, or that ultimately plateaued.

Me, I agree with the author of the article. It's possible that the technology will eventually get there, but it doesn't seem to be there now. And I prefer to make decisions based on present-day reality instead of just assuming that the future I want is the future I'll get.

▲

chollida1 7 days ago | parent [-]

> This is such selective hindsight, though.

Ha;) Yes, when you provide examples to prove your point they are, by definition, selective:)

You are free to develop your own mental models of what technology and companies to invest in. I was only trying to share my 20 years of experience with investing to show why you shouldn't discard current technology because of its current limits.

	▲	bunderbunder 7 days ago \| parent [-]
		Fair, but also, investing is kind of its own thing because it's inherently trying to predict the future based on partial information today. Engineering decisions, which is closer to what TFA is talking about, tend to have to be a lot more focused on the here & now. You can make bets on future R&D developments (e.g, the Apollo program), but that's a game best played when you also have some control over R&D budgeting and direction (e.g, the Apollo program), and when you don't have much other choice (e.g, the Apollo program).