This excludes most ideas that can affect the world.

Is not being worked on by anyone else (i.e. no direct competitors).

Dropbox had about a dozen when they started. Viaweb had none, but quickly had a dozen. Maybe the author means the latter is a good situation to be in?

The first mover has a major advantage. [...] Is a natural monopoly that can be defended.

Without funding, you won't be able to exploit these advantages. But they seem some of the most important to aim for, if possible. E.g. Uber and Ebay.

Solves an interesting and/or important problem that will make your mother proud.

Most parents are shocked by what their children work on which later turn out to be great ideas. There are an even larger list of parents who were right, though.

The author makes some good points. I'm misunderstanding the point of this list, I think. Aiming for all of these seems to exclude two kinds of ideas: those that can affect the world, and those that can get you rich. But aiming for a subset of them depending on your goals seems more promising.