Put another way: the median contribution of an employee at a great company is much higher than the median contribution of a maker or freelancer. The average contribution is up for discussion, but it is skewed towards the very few outlandishly successful.
Not nowadays any more, you can make several iPhone apps, web sites, etc. The products don't necessarily create millions, but they may be good investements.
For example, I make a crappy iPhone app in two days -> publish -> app makes $1000 -> good investment for me. For me, success=good investments of my time & money.
I think if I were to make a blog post or something out of it, I'd have to change a few things
Employees, freelancers, and "makers" can all work on product, and can all deal with customers. Don't try to tell me that a carpenter employed by a company doesn't "make" product.
Also, this graph's comparisons don't work. A start-up "makes" products, but an employee doesn't "make" a job. It's nonsensical.
Eli is implying that those who provide products independently and directly to consumers are superior to those working in a structured environment. It explains his choice of profession, but little else.
A good maker is also servant - to a vision, a muse, a genius or an ideal; or to the pragmatic makers who are also sellers: to a market need, to customers.
The diagram for an employee is also a little misleading, as today, most employees will have a series of employers over time, just as a freelancer mostly have a series of projects over time (though they can have them simultaneously).
there, fixed the chart for you...
