[dylan604]

"I just found 999 ways to not make a lightbulb."

SpaceX blowing up rockets but still being considered a successful launch test.

Many times in the world, you have to be wrong enough times to know that the suspected correct answer truly is correct. To call that directionless and flat is just naive on a very large scale.

There are times that some people can get to the correct answer faster, and it can be extremely frustrating to have the feeling of being held back or slowed down for everyone else to catch up. That's an ego problem that person needs to contend with and not a fault of everyone else.

[barrysteve]

Being wrong didn't give you the knowledge that your solution was correct.

Success/victory/accomplishment did.

It's not naive, it's a low level point.

Wrong is often directionless, and pivots and re-maps out a new solution when arbitrary failure arrives.

Right has cropped out the useless pathways, and is stuck between security and looking into the future. The direction of work is non-negotiable.

Wrong is often structured like a flat unlayered map where you fill it out with successes and failures.

Right, often has subjective approval of a layered interpretation, eliminating the need for trial and error.

The thing is, when things go right, it's rapid and easy and it's just business as usual. No one notices.

People crave wrong.

[quickthrower2]

The problem is the terms “wrong” or “right”. If I tell everyone confidently that https is all you need for a secure, privacy focused site then that is a different kind of wrong to companies that are set up to do experiments.