I feel uncomfortable with the level of arrogance that is becoming commonplace (and encouraged) among technical founders these days. On the other hand, I think

I feel uncomfortable with the level of arrogance that is becoming commonplace (and encouraged) among technical founders these days. On the other hand, I think the underlying vetting mechanism endorsed by this post is good. In many situations, the technical co-founder has more "hard skills" and is expected to do more work in the first few weeks (or months) of a startup's existence, and even if that isn't true, most technical co-founders probably perceive it to be true. Any "business guy" who proactively hustles before the product is ready will stand out from the crowd.