As a guy in tech, I agree wholeheartedly with everything Dave has said, and was surprised he said it in an actually non-offensive way, given his typical writing style..
However, something I took away from this that really surprised me was how little money Dave started with and how little he still has. Don't get me wrong, I would kill to have $300k in the bank, much less $600k+, but I've always assumed that angel investing (despite the small investments) was a game for the incredibly wealthy and I wouldn't be able to invest until I was in my 30's and had exited with more than a few million in the bank. When he points out that anyone with more than $10k lying around can be the next big angel investor, it really jumped out at me. I've never considered investing $5k or so into something I really believe in when $5k-$10k is all I have saved up... However, as he said, it would be hard not to get my money's worth by investing in startups. I'm glad he conveyed how easy it is to become an angel because otherwise I would have never considered it until I had plenty of "fuck you" money.
The problem is, you do need to be a millionaire to be an angel investor. IF not you open your investments up to liability unless you really are "friends and family".
This industry is regulated and McClure sorta completely glossed over it.
I would be an angel investor if I was allowed. I would have been doing it for the past 4 years, and I would have much enjoyed doing that. I had 6 figures and 20 years of startup experience and was ready to write checks.
I just never found a way around the need to get accreditation. (Note when you have a successful exit you have cash in the bank, but that doesn't mean you necessarily have a $250k a year job, or $1M in the bank!)
Maybe in the bay area there are lawyers who can set you up to do this even despite the regulations... I dunno.
But this seems to be a glaring omission on his part. Or maybe the law has changed recently and that's why his program could now work.