We write much of our documentation while the software is being developed--it's descriptive, not prescriptive. Works for us. Much better than waterfall.

Wow, all this butt-hurt over a site that nobody is forcing you to use, which sends invitations nobody is forcing you to read. Personally I like LinkedIn, and don't think I've been spammed inappropriately or offended by any content it's displayed to me. If you don't feel the same way, you're free to cancel your account. What's the big deal? So much outrage!

So are US workers incapable of or unwilling to make those same choices?

With the nice handicap of a higher cost of living.

We're talking about H1-B immigrants, not offshore workers. Doesn't the H1-B guy LIVING IN THE USA have the same cost-of-living handicap? How can he survive with such a smaller salary than the US worker?

Why does a "US worker" need so much more than an H1-B immigrant? Do they eat more expensive food?

How is it possible that an immigrant (who makes so much less than their US counterpart) can manage to survive in the USA with such a low salary AND have enough to help his family back home and eventually go back home to start a business? Whereas, as is claimed, if a US worker made that salary, he'd barely survive? It doesn't add up.

Beggars can't be choosers. If there is indeed this mythical horde of talented tech workers out there looking for work, surely they would prefer any job to no job. So, where are they all?

You couldn't afford to live in a cardboard box in Silicon Valley for $75k. It's pointless to try to put a dollar figure threshold on comfort without adjusting for your location.

What do venture capitalists and CEOs know about innovation?

... which is why I said "on average". The existence of a few outliers does not invalidate the fact that an overwhelming number of wealthy people are wealthy largely because their family is wealthy, not due to hard work (which anyone can do).

The bad news is... You're in Ohio!

Joking aside, whether or not you can move to a Third World State in the USA and still make a Bay Area salary is highly dependent on your employer. If I went in to work and asked my boss, "Boss, I'd like to move back to rural Pennsylvania, work remotely, and keep making the same salary!" it would take him hours to stop laughing. I suspect this is true for 99% of Bay Area employers out there.

It's not causal. Working long hours does not cause you to be highly paid or wealthy. If that were true, all a vegetable picker would have to do is work 120 hours a week and retire in comfort. A CEO does not make 800X what his average staff makes because he works 800 times as long.

Sadly, on average, the most accurate predictor of someone's income is their father's income.

I'm not sure how "cannot be discharged in bankruptcy" can be considered a "generous" term.

If I were 23 years old with $100K in student debt, I'd gladly exchange a non-dischargeable loan at 4% for a dischargeable one at 10%. Your payment goes from $1,000/mo to $1,300/mo, but that extra $300/mo is a price i'd be glad to pay for the option to default and have it wiped clean.

On the other hand, if someone does have the potential to make it big, it is in this company's best interest (and some would say society's in general) to "invest" in the person. It could end up paying off much better for everyone than the typical 9-to-5 job.

1. If you're deep in debt, your only real option is to do whatever it takes to get a steady, safe job that pays cash and lets you pay off the debt. Your "take home" after debt and living expenses is close to zero.

2. If you aren't deep in debt, but don't have the capital to start your own business, you still need to rely on working for someone else in order to live, but you might be able to chance working at a smaller company for some equity or something. Your take home is likely positive, and there's a little up-side if you luck into a company that does well.

3. Only those who both aren't in debt and have a butt-ton of capital have the option of doing their start-up. Your take home depends entirely on good luck and your ability to execute your business. Sky's the limit.

These guys are just trying to figure out how to move people from groups 1 and 2 to group 3, and then take a cut of the difference. Makes sense to me. I know if I had the capital, I'd start my own business in a heartbeat.

You don't think you have to pay back investors? These guys are essentially start-up investors.

Mine were pretty close to 7%, fixed. The federal ones are cheaper, but not everyone qualifies for them, and they only cover a limited amount of your costs.