useful != "Must Read"
Two things came to my mind when I landed on the page with links to 256 articles.
1) this isn't a "summary" of articles this is a "list of" articles. There's no time savings to be had by going through this list. In my opinion, it would be a wonderful & time saving "summary" if the article author read the article, and listed the key points contained within. As far as I can tell, the author of the list could just as easily have included the articles based on "has catchy title & contains a significant amount of text" How much repetition & Overlap? Which leads into my second thought upon landing on this page:
2) "Analysis Paralysis" - in the quest to become and entrepreneur one may very well get caught up on preparing to make that leap. There are numerous ways to do that, and the time spent reading those articles (256 articles * 10 minutes = 42 hours) could very well be better spent actually doing something
Anyways, I'm sure there are those that disagree with me (as evidenced by the down-vote you received). I certainly didn't evaluate the quality of the articles and maybe they're truly amazing, but I agree, this list isn't "MUST READ".
It looks like it's probably a quality list, but not "must read" or "a summary of"
EDIT: What I'd really love to see is an article entitled "What I've learned from reading all 256 'Must Read' articles" (don't leave out watching each of the videos linked up in full. That's at least 10 hours of TED talks)