This is interesting but can you expand?

My understanding of survivor bias is that you're getting a skewed picture because some of the data was excluded completely.

In this case it's survivor bias in that "We did these things and we didn't fail, ergo these things must be great."

Whenever you see a talk like this, always assume that it's BS. It might not be used by any real customers, or might still be in development. There might be a bunch of fires happening all the time due to things the talk doesn't mention. And it might be shuttered the next month if it's too expensive, complicated, obscure, or hard to support. These talks should only be considered aspirational sources of ideas, but never taken as a gold-standard battle-tested model, until they tell you how it fails. Only after you know how a system fails and how to respond to it can it be said to be reliable.

Focusing on the practices of successful companies makes you overlook the millions of other companies with the same practices, yet going bankrupt.

It is only through understanding what can fail that you can figure out causation.

And since Atlassian failed here, the talk might expose some of the failure's causes, or at least cast doubt over the usefulness of the practices presented.