I have a hard time trying to justify the Yahoo / SF comparison the article tries to establish. Yes I see the surface-level similarities; Yahoo was the leading website until it wasn't, and SF was the leading tech hub until one day it won't be.

How does the relationship evolve beyond that? The symptoms of a once-giant slowly losing its lead will be similar no matter which industry or entity you look at. You could probably force similar parallels about Blockbuster, Brittany Spears, the Soviet Union or even GM.

The author never bothers to develop any meaningful connection between the the reasons for their decline. They seem to hint at the fact that maybe hubris played a part - but it's all extremely unclear and I'm not going to read into it anymore than I need to.

In the end it's yet just another "SF ain't the hot thing anymore" article with a sensationalized title.