[igor_filippov]

I've met his followers in Berlin once, "naive" - the best word I can find to describe them. In the end, they struggled to answer the core question: "Why would anyone take seriously a man, who can't prove his idea in a lean way?". Please, build a city where everyone is happy and everything is handled by the machines, show the rest of the world you're right! Reminds me of wantrepreneurs who can't scrape together 10k to build an MVP for their startup idea. If you can't find money to build a prototype, then no sane investor should trust you.

[worldsayshi]

> If you can't find money to build a prototype, then no sane investor should trust you.

Sounds like a circular argument to me? I would agree with the notion that the ideas seem naïve. But how could grandiose ideas not be that?

[igor_filippov]

No, just put aside some money before quitting your day job and you're fine. Again, if you can't manage to fund development of your MVP, then maybe entrepreneurship isn't for you. I guess the same applies to the "Venus Project".

[worldsayshi]

In other words, if you're not rich entrepreneurship is not for you.

edit: Sure I realize that you can start with something smaller and fund able by smaller means. But how long until you can fund what you really want to create?

[igor_filippov]

If you can't make money, entrepreneurship is not for you.

[worldsayshi]

If you can't make money you can't build a better world?

[rukittenme]

Yes. Please rate the better world: World A (has food) or World B (does not have food).

Money isn't magic. Its an abstraction. Remove it and possessions become currency.

So if your better world does not make "money" (read: food, water, shelter, doctors, raw materials, etc.) then your "better" world will kill all of its inhabitants.