Absolutely everything related to this article except the sport itself. All innovation from now on should go through a committee of scientists and randomly selected individuals to avoid such fucking stupid ""innovations"" to ever exist.
This is super interesting to me -- I would expect that this world view would object to the comparatively extreme infrastructure and capital requirements of professional sports and other in-world consumption, vs. the relatively small outlays for digital consumption.
Is it more to do with resources misallocated from something to prevent human suffering, to something comparably suffering-neutral? (a VR headset with an NBA app on it)
While I can empathize with that, I don't think those resources would be reused in solving world hunger, poverty, access to medicine, or something more directly related to alleviating suffering.
If there's a direct connection here that I'm missing (one of the engineers abandoned a medical degree to become a developer) I'm willing to at least understand that. But otherwise your idea still seems rather tenuous.
Oddly enough, you don't have an issue with the sport, which is also suffering-neutral, and actually represents a massive capital and labour waste by comparison. (Stadiums, redirected tax revenue, bloated salaries, ownership structures)