You literally said "no incentive [...] other than good feelings." Regardless, even adding the words "direct financial" is still incorrect. For one of many examples, insurance companies investing in F@H infrastructure would be beneficiaries, albeit via savings and not revenue.
You're moving the goal posts, on top of changing the definition of "direct" to fit your false narrative. First you claim there was no incentive at all, then there was no "direct" incentive, and now direct apparently means "immediate" instead of linear.
If a company invests in research specifically because the fruits of that research will reduce expenses, that is direct financial benefit.
Expenses are the "loss" portion of "profit and loss." That is 50% of the concept of accounting, making it as direct as it gets. Please stop this prolonged line of trolling.
