What struck me about your post was the disdain you have for the tools that allow "non-professionals" to create applications. "But hey, I guess that’s what happens when you make the web so accessible that anyone thinks he can do it, too." Well, I remember the Internet before the web and you know what? I guess that's what happens when you make the Internet so accessible that anyone thinks they can do it.
I also notice you program in C# and Ruby, which (tongue in cheek) aren't real langauges. I mean, they're interpreted! You know, like BASIC. Meant for toy programs and people that don't know how computers really work. I still remember the time when applications (shrink wrapped applications) were written in Assembly language because even a compiled language like C produced "toy" applications (one reason why Lotus ate Microsoft's lunch in the early 80s---Lotus 1-2-3 was written in Assembly when Microsoft's Excel wasn't and it showed).
The whole point of things like assemblers, compilers and interpreters are to make programming easier so people can ignore gritty details and get on with their job. And as much as I hate PHP, it has allowed people who otherwise could not express their ideas, a way of expressing their ideas (personally, I wouldn't want to maintain their code or even look at it, but that's a separate issue).
As I read it, you seem upset that apps you deem stupid are getting funding and you aren't.
1) "Change the world" is a red-herring. There's a lot of very valuable and helpful work that people with a "change the world" focus will miss out on. A lot of people writing craplications believe they will change the world. It's a content-free sound-bite at this point. It doesn't translate into any world-changing behaviour.
2) The value of a thing has very little to do with how hard it is to make. This is a common trap that techies fall into: I worked really hard and didn't get rewarded while someone else spent a few hours and did get rewarded.
2b) If you're going to argue that we're incentivizing the wrong behaviours, well, that's an interesting argument that you didn't explore.
3) Unintentionally, your rant is analogous to the very apps you're criticizing. I.e. it seems you just kind of pooped it out. You apologize for pooping it out, but you don't do the things that could turn it into an insightful or useful article.
Just as various app stores are saturated with crap, news sites are saturated with random half-assed comments that would be funny over beer, but just clog the internets.
This reply like the article had vaguely immature tone to it, but it was also the second time the author had me laughing today. I don't see it as any different than Lewis Black going off on politicians. As long as you're smart about it, and not just being crude for the sake of it, it works.
If you feel that you need a disclaimer, why not improve the post to the point where you don't need a disclaimer, before inflicting it on HN?
It's one thing to rant to friends over a beer, but at least try to go through a few drafts or reviewers before inflicting such nonsense on the internet, permanently. Maybe try to address the first level of obvious criticism?
Re: me ... I have 0 dollars in outside funding, and some number of users who like my work. Unless you're saying that games are ipso facto useless, I'm not sure how this is relevant.
Seriously, just don't write this crap. It's no good.