I disagree with the underlying assumption that it's the universities responsibility to cultivate founders.

Universities were initially built to further the knowledge of specific fields, for the sake of its own advancement, producing philosophers, artists and scientists.

In other words, universities are for people to learn for the sake of learning, not to earn a wage. New institutions should be built to cultivate founders and entrepreneurs. Career development centers, maker spaces, co-working spaces, these are the places to build the entrepreneurial spirit.

▲

vehemenz an hour ago | parent | next [-]

That’s compatible with the thesis though. Read past the headline.

He says good founders learn actual stuff at college and get good at something, without any ambition to make it profitable initially.

	▲	fyredge 15 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It's... not? He's describing how to cultivate founders in university. I'm saying that it's not what a university should be focused on. A startup is not a technical project, it's an organisational endeavour. They don't live or die by the product alone, but by the market demand, organisational robustness and a little bit of luck.

▲

freetinker an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly. Answer: How universities of yore have “prepared” founders thus far. The premise of PG’s otherwise insightful prose is on shaky ground - or at the very least - debatable.

(I hope PG isn’t outsourcing his thinking to some agentic workflow.)

▲

kensai an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Although in principle I agree, cultivating founders could be an added mission.