I felt the same way but pg has since changed the title from "What You Can Learn from How to Ace a YC Interview" to "Billionaires Build" so he obviously wants to emphasize that aspect.
Marc Andreesen published an essay "It's Time to Build" [0]. He claims that ostensibly, COVID-19 inflicted acute trauma on the U.S. economy. But it merely excaberated the symptoms of a deeper dysfuntion. The root problem is the cultural decay of "a will to build". The solution is to rekindle this norm.
Several have published their own takes [1]. pg must have figured "What you can Learn from How to Ace a YC Interview" conveniently dovetails into the larger debate. Had he written the essay in a vacuum, I suspect he'd have emphasized "sell users what they want". Rather than the grand narrative "civilization is built by founders" which might increase exposure but possibly dilute the original intent.
[0] https://a16z.com/2020/04/18/its-time-to-build/
[1] https://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2020/06/on-cultures-that...
I'd say it's like writing an argument to decrease penalties for shoplifting and titling it "Don't Punish Thieves". It's not wrong, but it's certainly not a productive way to frame the discussion.
Here, I guess I'm of the belief that there's nothing wrong with billionaires; the wrong thing is how little there is for a billion people in the world.
To me, clickbait means that I'm luring you into reading an article by using a catchy title, but the content of the article doesn't exactly match what I expected; or that I use human psychology to trick you into opening a new web page (e.g. "you will never guess what happened next").
I instead find the title refreshingly nice and simple, and reading the article fully matched my expectations. Great "marketing" (the ability to pick a catchy title is good marketing) shouldn't be confused with being clickbaity.