[Replaced the comment I had here earlier after thinking about it a bit more. I initially responded too reflexively.]

The comment you are criticizing above was not meant for you. It was to give a counterpoint to your dismissal so that other people wouldn't lose their chance to learn about this just because a few naysayers on HN think they know better.

My pointing out some of my past experiences with naysayers was not offered as proof of being right, since you are correct that it isn't. I was partly offering my personal experience that naysayers shouldn't be assumed to be right. They may be, but shouldn't be assumed to be. Prominent examples include famous dismissals on HN of the original iPod and of DropBox.

In fact, in my experience, the greatest opportunities are when the naysayers are rampant in response. It's related to the famous saying from Howard Aitken: "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats."

Also, I do have a track record (not remotely as cherry-picked as you might want to assume it to be—in act I could give more supporting examples and I don't have many misses at this level). While it's not proof, it is evidence that some people (not you) might want to consider in judging whether they want to spend their time reading a paper like this, instead of rejecting it only because of comments from people who do not display any kind of relevant track records or any other basis for assuming their comments should be seriously considered.

I understand that you think you know better, and that's fine. I would have bet a substantial sum of money that my comment would have no influence on your dismissal. Still, as I said in my earlier response, I did learn something from your comment in terms of how some people might react to certain approaches, so, thank you.

I won't have any other comments in response to you in this thread, period. Life's too short.