But that's his point. If he was aware that his startup actually were a business, and not just a "startup", he would have operated it as a business (and likely learning and pursuing as much knowledge as he could).

However, the term "startup" took his focus away from thinking of it like a business. Once he realized that it actually was a business (which needs profits) he knew that it was a bad one and shut it down.

But that's... insane. Changing your entire perception of the company you own based on the labels that you have chosen to apply to it? When you run the thing you really ought to have a clearer idea of what is going on.

It's psychology - we all fall fowl of the labels we apply to ourselves.

FWIW, I downvoted your comment simply because I don't think that kind of snarkiness is appropriate here on HN.

That said, I agree that there is some basic, foundational knowledge that it sounds like the author of this piece was missing. That's not uncommon among technologists though, in my experience. Myself, I was in this field a long time before I got around to reading "The Art of the Start" and "The Four Steps to the Epiphany" and that's when I really started to understand more about this "startup thing."

So yeah, I agree there is some stuff the OP might want to read / research / study... but I would suggest ditching the snarkiness in communicating that point.