I used to be similarly uncomfortable about the "publish a fake product before you've actually built it" tactic. But I've since signed up for 3 products that didn't actually exist at the time - DropBox, RescueTime, and some analytics SaaS done by ex-Googlers - and each time my emotion was more mild annoyance rather than harsh anger. Heck, there's a whole industry (crowdfunding) now based around the idea of selling a product that doesn't exist yet and then using the money to fund development & manufacturing.
This is also not a new tactic - in the 80s, it was common for enterprise software companies to find an initial company, sell them the product, and then use the money to build the product. Microsoft did this with DOS - they sold IBM an operating system that didn't exist and then used the money to find someone who had written an OS for the 8088 and buy it from them.
Being asked politely and in an upfront way makes all the difference.
Nobody's ever going to fully externally validate an idea for you ahead of time. Just keep building until it seems like it's boring / you're poor / it has no potential. Don't go off and do it by yourself (without growth / people using it) if you want to build a real startup and not an art project.
I think a lot of times people are looking for an excuse to not build the thing they really want to build. Just build something cool, don't worry if it's an MVP or prototype or whatever. You don't normally have to talk to other people about MVP or prototype because talking about it is usually fake work.
> In 2008, Dropbox hit a key milestone on the path to their MVP when they released a video demonstrating their product. Tens of thousands joined the waiting list. So actually, the minimum viable product was the video itself
I'm not sure if I agree with this, because its suggesting that all you really need to prove your idea is smoke and mirrors. If Dropbox didn't have anything behind its video, we'd see a huge backlash from angry viewers wondering why they made the video before the product. I was under the assumption that an MVP allows you to get your product out quickly and change it with feedback. Not just for proving that your idea is widely desired.