I would suggest you don't understand the equivalence because it's not there. They aren't saying that creating something with polish is expecting to make money off it. They're saying when you start a new hobby or interest forget about trying to tailor your output to an audience that doesn't exist and focus on skill. Maybe you really want to produce something polished, but the reasoning for that should be for your own development and edification not because you want it to appeal to others. Prioritise what makes you happy and gives you enjoyment not what you think other people want.
I mean, consider there are a swathe of things I've made for self-development, that aren't released to others since they're incomplete, less usable for others not sharing the same brain, not great quality, etc.
It would weigh on me from an empathetic standpoint to not improve upon them if being released to others, so they're not and that's fine. Much like an artist's practice sketches they're intended for one's own private goals only.
The article isn't really framed like that though and downplays the internet as an inherent audience. Improving something even for just a random other person to enjoy/find utility in isn't inherently attention or money chasing, it's just bridging a gap.
