But the statement is not applicable to PayPal nor many of Thiel's "Web 2.0" investments. Yet it is used in the column as if it were. NB Section III. Do you understand?
Yea I get that. He shouldn't use that statement to defend what he has done, and I agree with that. It got me thinking about many of the Web 2.0 funding and if is has been used for developments that improve society as a whole. Many times yes, but not always. Either way, that simple statement holds a lot of weight and is very interesting, regardless of how he uses it to defend his own ventures. You just have to ignore that part and think about the idea he is presenting. I guess I would categorize his defense of his own funding as "fluff", because it adds nothing to his arguments, but only makes himself seem a little selfish.