The problem with the colored balls example is that the person drawing the balls from the bag assumes the balls are i.i.d. (independently identically distributed). Put in real world terms, according to the example entrepreneurs believe their field is unchanging. I don't think many entrepreneurs believe this. If the person drawing balls from the bag doesn't make this (wrong) assumption, then he is not at any disadvantage for having seen more draws from the bag.
The problem is this article is using scientific buzzwords to explain something that can be explained without the buzzwords. 300 years ago, "calculus", 50 years ago FFT, 15 years ago "Chaos Theory, 10 years ago, "Wavelets" and apparently now, "Bayesian statistics."
You raise a good point. I'm afraid that debating the essay on its technical merits will lead you to a fruitless discussion.