Well it's not like this is all a recent development. The Bay Area has been more expensive than Texas for about 150 years now, and yet SV is the big time, while Austin is a regional hub. "Land is cheaper! Employees will settle for less money!" is true pretty much everywhere except for NYC, and yet I don't see many companies moving to flyover country.

And of course, if a number of large employers all suddenly congregated in Austin, of course land prices would go up, salaries go up, etc...this doesn't all happen in a vacuum.

Which should be encouraged. Few people are all good or all bad, and there are certainly worse things he could do with his money.

lol sounds like it's interesting enough to you that you'd write three paragraphs about it.....

"Stealing is taking things from other people."

"Popular dictionaries and encyclopedias say that intellectual property theft is also stealing."

"Well, yes, but that's not a *true* Scotsman."

Wow. Give us what we want or we will fuck you even harder.

Are you in the habit of erecting obvious strawmen, or was this particular bit of off-target re-interpretation just special for me?

Although it does apply to this group -- they're telling the government, "give us what we want, or we'll try to hose some good science" So perhaps your post wasn't a strawman after all. Perhaps you're just confused as to who the culprit is in this situation.

Many schools ban bare-shoulder outfits, anyway.

That's like saying "many people try to force others into doing stupid things, so anything I want to try to force you into is good, right and holy."

Some dumb-ass school rule stands as absolutely no legitimate justification for pop-culture repression of personal and consensual choice.

All this particular interest group is doing by going against good science is making is less likely they'll get what they want.

The world goes the way the most powerful choose it shall go. So it has ever been, and likely will continue to go for the foreseeable future. Going against the good things the powerful do is just one more very efficient way to get them to consider your desires irrelevant -- a really poor way of trying to get the powerful to use said power in your favor.

These people are not "natives", either. They didn't evolve there. They're immigrants and descendants of immigrants. just like all of us on the US mainland, basically anywhere but (probably) Africa. Perhaps what you meant to say was "descendents of the earliest known settlers." Or perhaps "invaders" is more accurate.

Another thought along the lines of the powerful do what the powerful want to do... do you think the earliest of these folks took the time to see if the other local life forms wanted them and their changes on and around these islands? Did the fish want to be speared, for instance?

It's all a matter of perspective and power. These people seem to have neither.

Is that there is still dial-up AOL.

If you find that interesting, you may also be interested in the VMWare install script, which starts as a shell script but has a compressed binary attached to the end.

It's hard to believe that page is not satire.

How can you possibly know without reading the actual review, and also at least skimming the paper?

Too many offers is a result of more demand for programmers than supply of programmers. This can happen because of a bubble, or it can happen for other reasons. You can't automatically conclude it's a bubble.

Look for valuations to become unreasonable, that is the true sign of a bubble.

Then say what is going while also being technically accurate. To do otherwise makes you look ignorant.

Oh. In your initial comment I interpreted your writing to mean that they were targeting science. Whereas I interpret their actions to be targeting the EPA.

That seems like a better metric, but anything under 6% is 'full employment.' You don't want 100% employment because there will always be people who quit to look for new jobs, etc.

Instead of merely looking at the unemployment number, also look at the number of people who have been searching for over six months, and how many have dropped out of the workforce completely (although to get a clear picture, you should also try to determine why they dropped out).