Yeah, and the article starts off with some disclaimers, so I'm being a bit unfair.
Still, I think most of these points are either obvious or tautologies, and many of them can cause harm when they are focused on obsessively.
And, so I'm not just another critic, let me offer two points I'd make about startups that stand, somewhat, in opposition to the points made here:
1) Successful companies ship. This is often in direct opposition to obsessing over quality: you have to accept that your app, which is a piece of shit, needs to get out there, so you can get feedback, before you make it a gleaming cube of perfection.
2) Random chance is going to factor in your startups success far more than you'd like, so building a startup that will not die no matter what (rev/run > 1) is going to give you a better shot at making it over the hump. This often means putting up with uncertainty and not knowing exactly what you should be or will be doing. And it will be hard on you, mentally.
A counter example might just be an outlier, I don't think he was arguing in absolutes.
<Super-Succeess> is typically the outlier. You could have 100 companies with these traits, and 98 of them could fail. Its not clear with that type of failure rate you can really differentiate meaningful information, because the overlap of explanatory "data points" is just too noisy.
Super success is typically more of a black-swan. This is essay is less relevant in that endeavor. But it probably is not bad at all if it was merely aiming for "nice/er places to work". Or, "avoiding a bad bet" type of argument. That makes it closer to describing a "white swan", which again is not altogether useless. Its just not really what the title is proclaiming. Not that Sam would be unique in that regards, thoug. I think its fair to cut him some slack on that.
Of course, it begs the question: Do "super successful people" tend to eggagerate? Which is even itself an enlightening question. It seems many people believe in "fake it to you make it". But on the otherhand, many people who have "made it" tend to revert to understatement. And many more become successful merely with true confidence. So again...who knows.
thanks, that was a great article. my favorite quote:
> After any process that leaves behind survivors, the non-survivors are often destroyed or muted or removed from your view. If failures becomes invisible, then naturally you will pay more attention to successes.
another one:
> As the psychologist Daniel Kahneman writes in his book Thinking Fast and Slow, “A stupid decision that works out well becomes a brilliant decision in hindsight.”
