I think it's even simpler than this: most people learn their primary skillsets when they are young, and start businesses when they see large opportunities for themselves.
Because most people learn their skills when they are young (and most don't pick up new technological skillsets after ~30), the logical consequence is that the young tend to be more tech-savvy.
As industries mature, the barriers to entry (and domination) increase. Again, as a logical consequence, the youngest industries (which have the youngest practitioners due to the above) has provides best opportunities for entrepreneurs.
As a result, would-be entrepreneurs of Google/Facebook/Amazon stature are going to skew young. And seeing as starting a Google/Facebook/Amazon requires as much (if not more) luck as it does entrepreneurial talent, it only makes sense that the group who holds the most lottery tickets is going to hold the most winning lottery tickets.
Notice that the above logic requires zero assumptions about the relative skill of older or younger entrepreneurs. It's mostly just a numbers game.
My suspicion is that, "per capita", older entrepreneurs who have kept up with the most recent technological advances are more likely to be successful than their younger counterparts... but I'll be the first to admit I'm just idly speculating.
> and most don't pick up new technological skillsets after ~30
That is not my experience with people close to 40. There have been so many changes in the last 10 years, so if they hadn't kept up, they would be out of a job.
In 2008 the typical webapp where hosted on a physical server with server side generated content for desktop users (old versions of IE was in the majority).
There has been such a shift in the required skills and mindsets that many underestimate how different the daily work of a developer is now.
Because most people learn their skills when they are young (and most don't pick up new technological skillsets after ~30), the logical consequence is that the young tend to be more tech-savvy.
As industries mature, the barriers to entry (and domination) increase. Again, as a logical consequence, the youngest industries (which have the youngest practitioners due to the above) has provides best opportunities for entrepreneurs.
As a result, would-be entrepreneurs of Google/Facebook/Amazon stature are going to skew young. And seeing as starting a Google/Facebook/Amazon requires as much (if not more) luck as it does entrepreneurial talent, it only makes sense that the group who holds the most lottery tickets is going to hold the most winning lottery tickets.
Notice that the above logic requires zero assumptions about the relative skill of older or younger entrepreneurs. It's mostly just a numbers game.
My suspicion is that, "per capita", older entrepreneurs who have kept up with the most recent technological advances are more likely to be successful than their younger counterparts... but I'll be the first to admit I'm just idly speculating.