The article is interesting. As an entrepreneur myself, I see a lot of companies that don&#x27;t a) have an original idea b) are not trying to <i>really</i> disrupt any current technology or industry and c) Are spending a lot of money on what I deem &quot;worthless&quot; expenditures.<p>What IS interesting are these:<p><i>mingled at an industry networking event at the W Hotel in San Francisco in August 2014. The event — the Start-Up and Tech Mixer — is held every few months and typically draws hundreds of attendees.</i><p>- Who&#x27;s the company putting these on? Pretty sure they&#x27;re not free and are addressing the new for SV types to gather under some notion of &quot;networking&quot;.<p><i>Participants in Cal Hacks 2.0, a 36-hour hackathon in October 2015, building projects inside the football stadium at the University of California, Berkeley.</i><p><i>According to the event organizers, 2,071 participants attended from 143 schools and 10 countries.</i><p>- One of my business friends always said to &quot;go big&quot;. You want to have a hackathon for a few dozen teams? What about 1,000 teams? This is what these organizers did. Charge a small fee to the organizers, get companies to chip in free stuff and you&#x27;re off and running.<p><i>Around 45 people, many of them technology entrepreneurs, live in 20 Mission. The space is a former single-room-occupancy hotel that had been vacant for several years before being turned into the co-living community.</i><p>- Man, talk about real estate opportunities! Take a beat up forgotten building and turn it into a co-living community. Buy the building outright and let the residents pay your mortgage and then make a little on top of that. If you want to, drop some money into it and refurb it. Then in 5-10 years, flip it for big bucks.<p>What&#x27;s interesting is the companies they didn&#x27;t highlight are probably making good money on the goldrush as opposed to the majority of the companies and individuals presented.