Very explainable actions/choices sound boring, somehow not the best use of time

[sanjarcode]

Does falsifiability matter in motivations/justifications of decisions? Say career choices.

Example: "Stuff that bootstraps from manual to automatic, usually becomes a computational/analysis problem (lifting goods by hand vs discovery of oil and subsequent analysis of finding best land to lease)". So I should pursue data science, ML or software engineering! Sounds good, but isn't it too "provable". What about the processes that made oil possible (the 0 to 1 acts).

Fasifiability may not be technically correct, but about "easy to figure out" stuff that worries me. Adventure, unknowns, risks?
By falsifiability, I mean Popper's falsifiability.

nextL

Actions that are too explainable sound boring. And therefore somehow "not the best use of our time" Think about this.

note: not a statement, just an idea

[sanjarcode]

Maybe this itch is just a filter.

1. If a thing is explainable and straightforward to do, almost everybody can do it. Comparative market value would be low. Too much competition.
2. If it's straightforward to do, the chance of the task being automated (first order by engineering, or second order by promoting an AI in the future).
3. Organic input - there needs to be a certain minimum "empirical" data for generalization (analysis) to work and be tested.

The work should be both interesting to self. And if it's resource intensive - useful (saleable) for others (some).
Two sets with a sort criteria of "resource need". Find the common, but prefer the "self interesting".

nextL

Explainable "boring" tasks/domain feeling. Some "pros" for the idea. Cons not covered.

The market thing, I don't mean it as a "restriction engineering" motivation