I have always thought that programming fame might be a ticket-punch that you get and then no one questions your abilities from then on. I guess it isn't so. Thanks to the OP for treading this road and reporting back.
Maybe this is also true for web-famous entrepreneurs? Anyone ever start a somewhat well-known company that folded and you had to go work for someone else? Did you still have to earn respect from scratch at the new company?
Now I think I understand what I've wanted isn't possible. There is no way to prove yourself once-and-for-all. The only solution is to solve the money problem once-and-for-all, and then you never have to bother with proving yourself at a new company again.
You will still need to prove yourself at a new company if you ever want to produce something again. Life is long; early retirement can be REALLY REALLY long. At some point, you have to do something that you will find meaningful, however rich you are. At that point, you'll have this 'prove yourself' thing coming right back at you.
It's easier if you have a track-record of success, but 'proving yourself' is something that everyone is doing, constantly, with their loved ones, their workmates, in a way, even their local barrista.
If you want to work with people, you will need to earn their respect, admiration and trust. Being rich eases that path (for some), but it doesn't take away that fundamental truth.
But if you're financially independent, you can just do whatever gives you meaning; whereas if you're working for someone else, you've got to prove you'll add value in return for your pay.
Sadly, programming by itself will very rarely make you financially independent, especially if you're giving away your code.
I interpret that the author's fame doesn't help the author at all and that fame is a pointless asset.