Not sure why you think those 3 points aren't complimentary. They seem like great + useful takeaways. No, they aren't new, but they are useful.
Regarding your last point: nothing is a sure thing. Of course survivorship bias is a thing. Of course believing in yourself/ability to figure stuff out isn't a sufficient condition for success. But, maybe it's just a necessary one?
Well I'll freely admit that the 3 points I'm not fond of is directly a result of, rightly or wrongly, preferring stories of tenacity to feature sympathetic characters who strive for and achieve success through merit "idealistic" avenues and behaviors. Those areas I mentioned felt a lot like short-cuts, in that glorifying "cold calling with vaporware until we get enough money to actually make software" doesn't strike me as a useful example, if morals are of any value to the person taking action. It just didn't sit right with me, and thus isn't an admirable aspect of the narrative.
On the last point: Of course nothing is a sure thing, and not once has success come from "believing in yourself" trumped "talent and hard work" without straight up dumb luck. Whether starting a business, playing the lottery, or testing gravity by way of jumping off a large building, I think "believing in yourself" is flat out useless. Or, in a different way of phrasing it, "believing in yourself" is about as fundamental to entrepeneurship as waking up and getting out of bed - of course it's necessary, but that doesn't make the "you can do it too!" framing any less vapid.
Regarding your last point: nothing is a sure thing. Of course survivorship bias is a thing. Of course believing in yourself/ability to figure stuff out isn't a sufficient condition for success. But, maybe it's just a necessary one?