[r3trohack3r]

I don't know.

It takes a village to build something.

But it takes a leader to assemble a village around a cause.

I do appreciate your take. The village deserves credit for the work they've done.

But, at the same time, for many folks I see "well actuallyed" for their achievements because of the village... I don't think the change would have manifested in the world if the village didn't have that person.

An example I see more frequently now is that a market for electric cars wasn't willed into existence by Elon. There are variations of this claim, from him not being the original founder to the huge number of employees involved with Tesla's accomplishments.

But, at the end of the day, I have zero reason to believe Mercedes Benz would be releasing an electric car if Elon had decided to take his market winnings and go sit on a beach.

I have no reason to characterize the wolfram language, and its ecosystem, as anything other than a magnum opus that was willed into existence by Wolfram.

I'm open to being wrong here. But I've not yet learned why I am.

[CuriouslyC]

If an evil villain crushes a man's spine and the man develops technology to get revenge that allows him to walk, does that make the act of crushing his spine not evil?

[r3trohack3r]

I think in your example the evil villain set out to crush a man's spine, not to develop an exoskeleton to help people walk? And they are introduced upfront as an evil villain.

Wouldn't this be a more appropriate analogy:

If a person decides to will an exoskeleton into existence to help people walk, and builds a techno-capital machine capable of supporting the team necessary make it happen, is the act of building the exoskeleton not evil?

[CuriouslyC]

I think ignoring the villain portion of the analogy given the behavior of capitalist "magnates" is being overly generous.