"why [so-and-so] is wrong" is a great way to get your stuff read, but is so typically devoid of content and full of misunderstanding that i've grown to hate thi

"why [so-and-so] is wrong" is a great way to get your stuff read, but is so typically devoid of content and full of misunderstanding that i've grown to hate this type of post. the author clearly seems to misunderstand that PG's "rules" are simply ways to mentally lower the barriers to making something: 1. efficiency doesn't matter...as the author says, it matters later. so then get to work NOW 2. the returns on angel investing are bimodal...again, the simplification is used to motivate early stage startups to look for funding 3. valuations don't matter...the author's counterexample is ridiculous. PG's point is don't obsess if you're worth 14 mill or 16 mill, just get to work 4. investors who don't want to be first movers are assholes...i suppose this is the post the author wanted to write but didn't think it had enough content 5. you don't have to take notes...all PG was saying was: I'm posting this talk online. take notes if it helps you, you can think for yourself