Peer-review works in academia as generally the goal is not monetisation but the pursuit and quality of knowledge.
Don't think it translates well to startup culture (people with good ideas tend to just do them) and besides, when you look for funding you often get peer-review of sorts from angels/VCs/Banks.
It's true that there are potentially dangerous incentives, and it won't work for startups with significant trade secrets. However, there are a large range of startups, and some people are even willing to share their idea in public! This would be sort of a middle-way. If you have a business idea that you'd prefer to not post publicly on Hacker News but you're not afraid of it being stolen by experience entrepreneurs, then this would be the way to go.
Lastly, although VCs are a good source of feedback, usually going and pitching your idea means a significant commitment (quit your job already, developing the idea). Furthermore, this form of feedback doesn't work for bootstrapped startups and startups in small markets.
I disagree. I assume you're afraid they're going to steal you're idea? The only way that would matter is if they care about it enough to do as good a job as you're going to do. I could hear a thousand ideas and probably none of them would be so compelling that I would drop my own projects to work on it.
