Who deliberately did not stay in academia to do it. More to the point, a successful team building a product like a search engine requires roles that academia doesn't really have.

Who is doing product management?

Who is doing product marketing?

etc

This is all applied engineering at this point, not R&D. How does it at all fit into academia's strong suit?

I think that maybe the point is this is not being tackled as a purely economic endeavour (or if it is, it’s in the “indirect” manner), as such, I suspect roles like “product marketing” are probably unnecessary, at least for now.

Also, tell me you wouldn’t love to work on a large project that wouldn’t be subject to the arbitrary whims and promises of the marketing department.

> the point is this is not being tackled as a purely economic endeavour (or if it is, it’s in the “indirect” manner), as such, I suspect roles like “product marketing” are probably unnecessary, at least for now

Which results in an interesting engine nobody uses. Products that start with the tech and then think of selling it fall on their faces for a reason.

Google started with tech and disdain for online advertising. They didn't start with the ads.

and were forced to pivot because it didn't work to do it that way, empirically disproving your thesis?

They weren't forced to pivot. Gates explained to they how much money is to be made and they changed their mind. For some time they were very excited how unobtrusive and helpful the ads were. Then they realised there's even more money and the rest is history.

Is Google proves anything, it's that greed is real.