You're arguing that reducing your chances for success is the only way to succeed. You presume that if you aren't about to die, then you must be lazy. You pr

You're arguing that reducing your chances for success is the only way to succeed. You presume that if you aren't about to die, then you must be lazy. You presume that the only model is unprofitability until someone either buys you or you get shut down. You presume that reducing the number of scenarios by which a founder will become wealthy somehow motivates the founders more. You say business should be shut down if they don't fit in the model you describe. This is a very narrow view. Its also a very polarized view-- it seems to be the perspective that either you're trying to be the next youtube or you're opening a farm. There really is quite a spectrum between them... and far more high tech successes are not youtube type situations. That's an extreme rarity. You're locked into a mentality that causes you to repeat this perspective, and you don't seem to be responding to what I'm saying, and I just don't see things that way. So, I don't see much point in continuing this thread. Good luck if you decide to start a company!