I think you misunderstand. My point is exactly the point you're making in the last paragraph: Everything is speculation until you prove it, and this article does not prove much of anything. I'm not the one claiming that we have "a big problem," so I have nothing to prove. If you want to see change, it's up to folks like you and Vivek to show the rest of us the money.
I don't mean to sound hostile or bicker. I'm just saying, this is how influencing people works. If you want people to believe something, you need to convince them, not count on them to convince themselves. If your argument is unconvincing, it's in your interest to fix that, not berate people for noticing its weaknesses. Think of it like selling investors on your startup.
If you want to change things, making a strong case that convinces people they need to invest in your cause is probably a more efficient route than fumbling in front of a greater number of VCs. With a few exceptions, people who stand on street corners shouting things that they can't prove tend to destroy their credibility.
I don't mean to sound hostile or bicker. I'm just saying, this is how influencing people works. If you want people to believe something, you need to convince them, not count on them to convince themselves. If your argument is unconvincing, it's in your interest to fix that, not berate people for noticing its weaknesses. Think of it like selling investors on your startup.
If you want to change things, making a strong case that convinces people they need to invest in your cause is probably a more efficient route than fumbling in front of a greater number of VCs. With a few exceptions, people who stand on street corners shouting things that they can't prove tend to destroy their credibility.