WoW uses Lua, which is actually known for having a very simple and easy to use interface with C code. I even found an example on the Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lua_(programming_language)#C_API

The original x86 had 4 ring levels and segmentation, and at the time we got AMD64 no one was using them (or at least Windows/Linux/*BSD weren't using them). AMD removed security measures because they weren't popular.

So? I don't get your point. Are programmers from outside the Bay Area prevented from applying to work at companies like Google/Facebook? Quite the opposite. However, if you're looking for a guy to write your next database engine/compiler/OS kernel/Internet-scale search engine, you will hit a shortage.

They do fit in, but there's a huge distinction and there are different levels of "IT worker". Not everyone has the same skills or gets paid the same. In some categories there is a real shortage. For example, most "IT workers" can use a database engine (like Oracle or MySQL), but very very few of them could also write that database engine efficiently (how many sysadmins know what a B+ tree is?)

Both the summary and some commenters make the same huge mistake by putting IT people and programmers in the same bucket. A C++ programmer has completely different skills and responsibilities from a PHP/HTML programmer, who has a completely different job from a network/system administrator. The latter could be considered IT (and their pay is usually lower), whereas the former are developers (requiring extra creativity and more skill, and are better paid). In my experience working in the Bay Area, there really is a shortage of competent high-skill systems developers/programmers (the kind of guys who design Google and Facebook infrastructure, like Big Table), but not a shortage of PHP or Java programmers or sysadmins.

I also mentioned Flash, which was the same bad idea with a good implementation.

Two words: Java applets. This is exactly how they work, and it's a mess. You have to start the JVM every time you load an applet (or load it with the browser and keep it around), and then the UI is a mess. JavaScript inside a browser (with access to the DOM) is so much cleaner and faster (relatively) than the previous mess that were applets. Also similar is Flash, but Adobe got Flash performance to a decent level. However, both Flash and Java applets are going away (for good reason), and the future is probably HTML5 + JavaScript.

Or others such as buying an engagement ring, tampons, laxatives and many others. Do you really want others to know about everything you spend money on?

I'd prefer non-authoritarian anything (preferably, non-authoritarian free market capitalism).

So they have no say in how YOU spend THEIR money? That's not democratic, nor is it moral.

The problem is government aid is an expense which requires money. National budget money comes from 3 sources: 1) Taxes. There's a big misconception about taxes: people think that these can be raised arbitrarily to raise all the money the government needs. In practice, this doesn't work; businesses close and rich people move their money. 2) Borrowing. This is good for present generations, but bad for future ones, especially considering that borrowing comes with interest. 3) Inflation. Past a certain point, this is universally considered bad (it turns into hyperinflation). If there isn't enough money from these 3 sources, there's really no other reasonable choice but to limit aid.

If Obama is right wing to you, who's left wing enough? Lenin? Obama's economic policies have been nothing less than socialist.

Also, let's not forget Obamacare (it wasn't all him, but he was a strong supporter of that). In general, Democrats are left-wing economically, while Republicans are somewhat right-wing (with their focus on lower taxes and regulation). The third-biggest party is the Libertarian Party, they're the truly right-wing party in most regards, but almost no one votes for them.

Economically, Obama is pretty far to the left (with all that "you didn't build that" nonsense and raising taxes on the rich).

Right, I was talking about federal taxes (and by extension state taxes). The only local taxes I can think of are sales and property, where you do make a good point.

In what way is this a reasonable response to what I said?

As I also said in a higher post, the companies don't pay much, but employees pay A LOT of taxes (back-of-the-envelope: if you're making 100k/year, about 20k of that goes to the IRS). You're saying they don't get to use the infrastructure they paid for?