Bitcoin came from an independent researcher. That's the polar opposite of a corporate research arm.

I'd guess that most innovation comes from startups and smaller companies that get acquired, or iterative product development that aligns with a company's primary focus (iPod, Office, Ford's electric pickup) and not from dedicated experimentation organisations.

Corporations are poorly setup to benefit from innovation anyway. The funding model doesn't encourage the right incentives, and true innovation becomes political. A classic example is Kodak's early invention of the digital camera, which was a threat to the companies cash cow.

Usually bad ideas die in a test phase. This is a pure money grab completely at the expense of the consumer. The question they asked themselves was, “how inconvenient can we make the shopping experience without alienating our customers completely, in order to extract more revenue at the expense of their experience in our stores?”

Because this has zero benefit for shoppers.

Ironic that Bitcoin is your example here, as it definitely did not originate in the experimental arm of a corporation.

Your last point confuses me. Bitcoin has made some people richer, some people poorer, but it has not made the world a better place, nor found much use as a currency, and there’s still not a convincing case for blockchain as an important algorithmic invention.