I don’t disagree with the sentiment and point of the article.
That said, I’d argue that if as a startup you believe you’re probably going to quickly and easily achieve product market fit, it is perfectly rational to focus on laying the right technical foundations so you don’t end up saddled with tech debt down the road. Once the product has become complex, rewrites are incredibly hard. And there are multibillion dollar companies out there dealing with the consequences of a tech decision a founder made in the first month of development while being focused on finding product market fit.
Sure. I think I'd maybe go one step further than the headline and say that for startups, unless it is what you are explicitly building from scratch and selling, your tech stack should never be the product.
Laying the right technical foundations shouldn't be difficult -- it should be generally be picking the most boring[1], dependable choices that you've been able to rely upon in the past.
I had a pretty negative reaction to that title but completely agree with the post (and largely with the example choices). I think I'd rephrase it more as "choose proven technology", cause "boring" to me conjures up images of Java hell.
That said, I’d argue that if as a startup you believe you’re probably going to quickly and easily achieve product market fit, it is perfectly rational to focus on laying the right technical foundations so you don’t end up saddled with tech debt down the road. Once the product has become complex, rewrites are incredibly hard. And there are multibillion dollar companies out there dealing with the consequences of a tech decision a founder made in the first month of development while being focused on finding product market fit.