[tuatoru]

I think the article is itself an example of broadly correct but for the wrong reason.

the problem with the argument from first principles that the article attempts to refute, is that the "first principles" given carry an implicit assumption that the minimum viable product is a a null product.

If in reality the mvp or, later, the infrastructure for growth take more to create than the resources you command, you need to raise capital.

The "first principles" also ignore time to market and competitive pressures. They are more "spherical cow on a frictionless plane" principles than actually useful ones.