> I considered her opinion on tech to be invalid when she claimed that tech isn't merit based. She links to a research based critique of the meritocracy narrat

> I considered her opinion on tech to be invalid when she claimed that tech isn't merit based. She links to a research based critique of the meritocracy narrative right in the article, right in the point on meritocracy. Please read TFA. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/12/us-usa-startup-connections-insight-idUSBRE98B15U20130912 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/12/us-usa-startup-con... > That rather explains her position. She doesn't get into the low lying details of tech. You have to be able to write your own compiler to have any insight into the social dynamics and economic realities of silicon valley? Do you really believe this? Your assertion is laughable. It's clear that once you judged her opinions "invalid" you read just enough of the article to rationalize your opinion.