Yes, that happens too. We all think we have the idea of a lifetime (and I have had a few), but there are the ideas that are subject to reality, or better stated, they offer an idea to question reality. That does not make the idea worth anything, beside the option to consider new IP in ways that the writer (me) did not consider for a few obvious reasons.
One such idea I discussed earlier, I had it as an idea (not IP) but the setting to use it to ask questions is actually stronger. You see, the NSO group called a few things into question. One of these questions is the lack of security from most Android and iOS devices. The NSO group created a solution that both are not able to counter and even as they both point fingers, no one is seemingly able to ask the question “Why is this not more secure?” As such I came up with a new kind of mobile, a new approach to communication. It is not actually new, it is decades old. In the old days the police walkie talkie had crystals, and as the system went over these crystals, the conversation went over a few frequencies. Now this is old technology, we get that. But consider the image below
A setting where we have a mobile with three frequencies (not shown), one with 5 and one with 7. The 5 has four options, a-e, e-a, a,c,e,b,d and d,b,e,c,a. That phone would use 5 channels, all 5 transmitting, one real, the rest alternating kinds of noise. And as the phone changes (in call) between the four options the call is close to unbreakable. At this point, only state players would be able to get to the call (with a lot of hassle and loads of conversation loss). The setting becomes a lot more complex if the mobile provider adds its own hassles to the phone. I would delusionally call it ‘True Security’ it has two factors and only if both factors are known one has a chance of hacking the conversation and the 7 channel one has at least 4 more options, as such it is a no-go for most players. And this matters, how much would you pay for secure calls? Me? Not that much, I have nothing that require that level of security, but tech companies, lawyers, accountants, Wall Street, the list goes on and they will pay loads for true security. Big Tech are all about getting more out of a cheap solution (Google, Apple, Samsung) but the times are changing. At present a player like Blackberry could get a decent share in todays market. In a stage where all say it isn’t possible, the innovator will get the last laugh and there is every chance that such solutions will be required. Generic mobile IP is running its last course to some degree. The people they want will demand real change and preferable with hundreds less zero day defects. So is my solution the bang for buck? I doubt it, but there is a setting that is evolving and these people will seek cheap solutions first and when they agains get hacked by students and organised crime someone in a place like Wall Street will shout “Get me a real solution or you are done for!” And at that point big-tech wakes up realising that there setting of cheap and easy profit is over. Will I be proven correct? That depends if the Ukraine issue resolves itself I doubt that changes will be made, but if that escalates, it will be about resources and know how and that is when someone takes my idea and innovates the mobile phone. There is no other way that will play as I presently see it.
It is just my view on the matter.