"Look at an MIT graduating class of engineers," O'Leary said. "The smartest people want to work on the [block]chain. So you've got the majority of the best intellectual capital in the world solving poor outcomes on the chain — why wouldn't you expect that to work?"
Is his heuristic good? Are there examples of many highly intelligent people being drawn to work on technologies or ideas that ultimately prove useless?
Actually if it wasn't crashing, it would still be a bad idea to listen to Kevin O'Leary. Or you could think about whether the majority of smart people are working on crypto (clearly false, there isn't that much crypto work being done relatively speaking), how much work MIT are really doing on blockchain, or how smart the people working in crypto really are (some of them must be), or whether the career choices of these 20-somethings tells you anything more than crypto being a field that pays well (until recently).
I mean Michael Saylor went to MIT, and he's an unhinged lunatic who tells people to borrow money and mortgage their house to buy Bitcoin because it's going to a million.
“I have never done anything "useful". No discovery of mine has made, or is likely to make, directly or indirectly, for good or ill, the least difference to the amenity of the world.”
He also wrote:
“It is never worth a first-class man's time to express a majority opinion. By definition, there are plenty of others to do that.”
Like most leisured smart people of his time and place.
Good luck.