This is about the myth of meritocracy, or at least, the myth that skills matter more than anything. While its /more/ true in software than anywhere else (where what is valued more is social signals, diplomas, other signifiers of possible skill), it has never actually been true in the way that many say it.
In my life I've seen the most brilliant, talented, driven, and effective people be completely unable to find paid work doing what they do best. This isn't even because there is no money in doing what they do best - many of those things are multi billion dollar industries. Its because they put all their points into a single skill tree. The second they start putting points into relationships, and manage to get past the early stages, suddenly their skills become relevant and it starts working, and they're seen for what they can do.
I suspect this is what happened to OP:
> During the day, I worked 8-9 hours for this startup, and until late at night I continued my open source contributions. Surely, they would take me somewhere.
When you play Starcraft at a decently high level, scouting is super important - not even necessarily to see what the other side is actively doing, but the important information to learn is what they cannot be doing. If they have 3 of one building producing units, they can't be building a different type of unit. I shoe-horned that Starcraft analogy to say: if you're spending every waking hour coding, you're unlikely to be building relationships. Especially if your goal is to be paid for doing something useful, relationships with people with money to pay you are necessary.
I'm almost certain I'm not as talented an engineer as the OP. I have my moments, but my attention and desire to work out different skill trees is too high to prioritize time like they have. All this to say: there's a lot of myths out there about what is valued, and if you take some advice literally you will find yourself pidgeonholed into doing exactly that and only that.
In my life I've seen the most brilliant, talented, driven, and effective people be completely unable to find paid work doing what they do best. This isn't even because there is no money in doing what they do best - many of those things are multi billion dollar industries. Its because they put all their points into a single skill tree. The second they start putting points into relationships, and manage to get past the early stages, suddenly their skills become relevant and it starts working, and they're seen for what they can do.
I suspect this is what happened to OP:
> During the day, I worked 8-9 hours for this startup, and until late at night I continued my open source contributions. Surely, they would take me somewhere.
When you play Starcraft at a decently high level, scouting is super important - not even necessarily to see what the other side is actively doing, but the important information to learn is what they cannot be doing. If they have 3 of one building producing units, they can't be building a different type of unit. I shoe-horned that Starcraft analogy to say: if you're spending every waking hour coding, you're unlikely to be building relationships. Especially if your goal is to be paid for doing something useful, relationships with people with money to pay you are necessary.
I'm almost certain I'm not as talented an engineer as the OP. I have my moments, but my attention and desire to work out different skill trees is too high to prioritize time like they have. All this to say: there's a lot of myths out there about what is valued, and if you take some advice literally you will find yourself pidgeonholed into doing exactly that and only that.