> So it's not an uncommon meaning. Delusional, but not uncommon.
"Innovation is a vehicle for the creation of wealth" isn't defining innovation as creation of wealth, it's saying [innovation as defined] is a vehicle...
The full quote: "Innovation is a vehicle for the creation of wealth. Innovation is in and of itself fairly worthless. The only reason the concept of innovation is so popular is because of the value (and the valuations) we put on companies who are seen to be innovating"
I don't see how that can be interpreted that way in context.
> 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.
Ah, I see. I wasn't arguing that the person I quoted was using the word innovation in that way but that they were explaining the same worldview: That the benefit of innovation is the generation of profit.
So it's not an uncommon meaning. Delusional, but not uncommon.