I've managed to convince myself even further that to call something interesting necessarily indicates that it is or could lead to a solution. Why? If it weren't the case why would we be more inclined to follow models that produce something "interesting". Why would we say, "I'm going to continue changing the variable of blah that controls density because it's interesting..." unless that interesting behavior implied that the model could answer questions for us. If a model is "boring" it means that we don't think we could find solutions from it, so we abandon it. I'm not saying that if a model behaves interestingly, we know right away what solutions it might tell us. The implications of "interesting" models may be unknown at first and surprising, but it doesn't mean that we presume any less that following an interesting phenomena will lead us to a solution, and boring outcomes lead to nothing.