In general means being a founder or working for a startup will become this watered down term for a money losing profession.

In the 10s, a startup was a specific kind of business that used cloud computing and has zero marginal cost for the next unit of production.

Today, people are calling themselves founders of startups but the marginal cost of a unit once you including labor is higher than revenue. Many aren't paying themselves, so its just nepotism investment, founders living off family cash, for an app or a thing that has no chance of becoming viable. How's that not capital destructive?

founding or working on an early stage startup has always been -EV. If you're in it for the money, you're simply making a bad decision. It's closer to being an actor or musician than anything else

didn't say they were the same! just closer :) more about the power law distribution of outcomes than anything else

Has someone who knows many musicians and startup founders, one of those groups has a whole lot more money than the other almost universally

Still funny how many people pitch like it’s a rational decision. If you’re in it for money, just go write AI newsletters

++ to this. Grinding out 80 hour weeks at Goldman is a much better path to wealth than grinding out 80 hour weeks on a startup (or at any big company for that matter)

If you aren't in this game because you love it then you should switch games

Definitely the worst career decision that I had no choice but to make, lol.

pg's def of a startup (and indirectly of the founder) still rings most true to me.. "A startup is a company designed to grow fast. Being newly founded does not in itself make a company a startup. Nor is it necessary for a startup to work on technology, or take venture funding, or have some sort of "exit." The only essential thing is growth. Everything else we associate with startups follows from growth."

But not sure we use the words entrepreneur or founder with much distinction these days.