Let's race 10 miles. I run each mile in 5:59 and you run each mile in 6:00. You get a mile head start. Whoops—this fable is only true "eventually", if the slopes remain the same as t→∞.
I'm curious, do you think Ousterhout or the people quoting him are confused about this?
I'm with the commenter (here) who said that real life is more likely to be an initial-value-dependent or path-dependent PDE. Someone else said having a high-IV person on your team will raise the slopes of everyone else which seems also right: the issues are multidimensional, not affine 1-D.
Ousterhout is taking sides (smarter > more experienced) which is fine; he can make that argument. But using y=mx+b as x→∞ doesn't count as an argument; it's rhetorical flair, not rhetorical substance. The substance of his reasoning seems to be "That's my opinion based on my experience in my past jobs".