I don't exactly see it this way - "You can only do this by doing actual discovery interviews with prospects in an unbiased way where you explore their experience around specific problem areas without ever mentioning your brilliant solution - as proposing a specific solution is likely to bias your subject."
Sometimes the entrepreneur needs to expand the possibility space, rather than just addressing an "unmet need". There's the Jobs-ism about figuring out what the customer is going to want before they do. Thiel also talks in Zero to One about some of the biggest innovations not spawning from customer feedback or lean methodology.
I wouldn't say that GPT addressed a problem I had per se. It just created a whole new set of activities I wanted to try.
One of the best HN posts I’ve ever read. Thanks for sharing your story. I don’t have any doubt you’ll be happy about your pivot and successful in your next phase. Good luck.
100% agree with this. If we seek true breakthroughs, we need highly experienced and focused teams working together on specific problems. These teams should be comprised primarily of staff scientists, like they have at the national laboratories like Lawrence. Given how high of a priority the US government places on funding biomedical research, it doesn't make sense for the vast majority of funding to be allocated to principal investigators who count that research project as only one of their numerous job responsibilities. Nor does it make sense for that work to be executed by under-supported postdocs and technicians. Instead, cultivate a career track that goes from grad student to junior -> senior staff scientist. Prioritize positions other than academic faculty with continuity and the ability to focus primarily on making steady research advancements.