Okay I didn't make it through the entire thing yet but this part stuck me and is my takeaway so far (kinda a tangent but ya know how it is):
If you are thrifty and keep a tight grip on your expenses, you can continue to live within your means more or less indefinitely. Investors sometimes say mean things about these "lifestyle businesses" but you don't have to care what investors think.
I'm thrifty and an expenses master and seriously the one thing I want in life is two be able to ditch my 9-5 and myself (and maybe a buddy) run a sustainable business. I don't even want to be rich, I'm happy with my income level, I just want to ditch boredom and work hard on my dreams so so so so so so sooooooo badly.
Lifestyle businesses are not in vogue, neither is monetizing too early. But if you don't take VC money, you just have to worry about whether you can pay friends and family back and create a sustainable company. Easy peasy.
The author of that piece is mixing her critiques poorly. Silicon Valley is rigged because the successful are just connected, but they are also just lucky. It can't be both.
Why can't it be both? Connected by virtue of birth or cohort.