This whole conversation is frustrating because it is boiling down to a stupid semantic debate. The author is claiming that people don't get paid to explore data, they get paid to find things. IMHO, this statement doesn't even make sense. When I explore data, I almost always find something. This something might not be useful to an "end user," but it is almost always useful and necessary.
Sometimes, the only thing I find by doing exploration is that a particular dataset is absolute garbage and shouldn't be used for any purpose. The only way I find stuff like that out is if I explore the dataset.
Sometimes, the only thing I find by doing exploration is that a particular dataset is absolute garbage and shouldn't be used for any purpose. The only way I find stuff like that out is if I explore the dataset.