You're right that PG ignores the privilege and selection bias at play in all stages on the funnel to Google-scale success. I'm okay with that though, because calling out all the statistical realities does not lead to actionable advice for young people; it tends to devolve into hand-wringing and complaining about what "we" as a society should do, but very few are actually empowered or incentivized to address. And, at the end of the day, if you're looking for a single place to find good co-founders, it's hard to argue there is any better place than Stanford or MIT. I think Paul's advice on balance is decent, even for folks starting from less privilege.
That said, I think the biggest risk for ambitious young people reading this is black and white thinking about getting into the right school. Successful founders are relentlessly resourceful, so while it's a decent plan to target a top school, I believe that how you handle rejection and refocus your ambitions says more about your long-term entrepreneurial prospects than being accepted would have. Focus on what you can control, play to your strengths, and on balance you'll get better outcomes.
That said, I think the biggest risk for ambitious young people reading this is black and white thinking about getting into the right school. Successful founders are relentlessly resourceful, so while it's a decent plan to target a top school, I believe that how you handle rejection and refocus your ambitions says more about your long-term entrepreneurial prospects than being accepted would have. Focus on what you can control, play to your strengths, and on balance you'll get better outcomes.