Hacker and non-hacker partnership scenario. Would you?

Non-technical working professional has business idea and wants Hacker co-founder to build a prototype. Non-technical will put up money to develop prototype and compensate Hacker with salary + equity, or any mutually agreeable compensation structure. Non-technical will provide rough cut of what the vision is and then step back and let Hacker work without interference. The only product control Non-technical wants would be editorial/final say. If prototype gets traction and scales, Non-technical would concentrate on business, fundraising and hiring the best people for the business and product ends.

Non-technical's motives: wants to invest in a great idea, company, and team but isn't considered an "accredited" investor, is risk averse to the extent that Non-technical wants to keep their day job in case product doesn't scale (has spouse, kids, etc), and is genuinely fascinated by startups and hackers and using disruptive technologies to punch bloated business models in mouth. And to prove that passion is willing, initially, to use their own funds to launch a minimum viable product.

Is this a scenario that a hacker would be interested in? Why or why not? Are there any holes or issues with the hypothetical? Looking forward to the commentary.

Update #1: Has anybody actually been a part of such a scenario? If so, care to comment on the successes, failures, upsides or pitfalls?

You have to be very careful to avoid falling in the "build this for me and I'll share it with you" trap, because talented individuals get pitched this way all the time. In fact, you're going to get lost in their mental spam filter if you don't deviate from this stereotype immediately.

Whether you yourself feel this way or not, leading off with admitting you can't do what they can do by yourself, that you're willing to pay handsomely for their help, and that you bring a significant amount of value to the table yourself (not just money, ideas, vision, and a sense of ownership but the ability to raise capital, sell to people, etc.), will be the path to landing the best cofounder.

How is that going to happen if the business partner is working a day job and waiting for Godot?.

Products don't sell themselves. Customers don't provide their own customer service, etc. Having final say is just having a non-technical opinion, it's not a real commitment. A founder who puts up cash is nice, but not a substitute for sweat, and is best treated as a loan rather than exchanged for equity.

I am not saying the roses won't grow, but I don't see the scenario as ideal for either partner - the employee/employer relationship is well below ideal.

This also sounds like doublespeak: "work without interference" vs "editorial/final say." Sounds like "final say" is still basically unlimited, and I'd rather get approval before doing the work than after!

[1] $200k annual income or $1m assets (sans house)