Yep.
Even so, this is a classic straw man argument, also it assumes that if the "pretend brother" invented Microsoft, then Bill would be a "Disaffected Blue-Collar Grunt", or somesuch.
Why couldn't BOTH brothers be successful? One reinvent software, and one reinvent hardware? Or both of them team up to quadruple MS in size? Or some other premise?
“also it assumes that if the “pretend brother” invented Microsoft, then Bill would be a “Disaffected Blue-Collar Grunt””
Actually, the article ridicules the notion that a man like Bill Gates would be reduced to a grunt just because someone else had gotten the luck that day. The point is that Gates would have simply gone on to succeed at the next opportunity, and liberals would likely still be calling him “lucky.”