Worst case, they give you tumors, which we'll take care of.

You need to watch and understand the video of the report to understand its severity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGFsHhu7sJ0

The devices are supposed to be for identification purpose only - an RFID device can very well do that. So the fact that it needs a battery is already fishy - why use a more expensive device that needs more maintenance instead of cheap, readily available devices that need almost no maintenance?

The professor in question had actually disassembled the device in question, and it was the professor who pointed out the existence of microphone and voice ADC chip on the device - there's totally no need for such things for an identification tag that passes you through customs.

You can still get the basement alright, somewhere in Guantanamo.

That's because you've set your bar of a "God" way too low - it's not like they've changed the vacuum speed of light, or the gravitation constant, or made 1+1=3 for everywhere in the universe, yet.

Then please go check out this page, from the horse's mouth:

http://thielfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26&Itemid=19

The "impossible" biotech guy you just talked about, has been working at a PhD degree in Stanford when he was 19 - ok, his startup is in the education field instead, I can give you that. But do you seriously think that guy still needs another degree?

And, outside of the list, Linux 2.4 was maintained by a 18-year-old, and that's a very non-trivial job as well.

Please... go read about the people who got the 100k before assuming they're just your average 19-year-old:

http://thielfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26&Itemid=19

There're people who're already in PhD programs by the time they're 19, and then people who'd founded venture backed companies before they got accepted by Stanford. These guys are not your average 19-year-olds. They're given the 100k precisely because they don't need the education any more. And very probably also because they don't really need the money.

You really should check out the people who got awarded the 100k, then. Unless you're already a billionaire, it's pretty hard to say they're failures - in fact, the reverse is much more likely to be true. The 100k is given to people who don't need the college education.

He already has 2 patents before he was accepted by Stanford, and has already opened more than 10 companies, and his current company already has significant backing. Peter Thiel's award is only given to people who don't need college.

Shares aren't given out for free - even for the founders themselves they almost always have a vesting schedule which means they don't actually own all the shares up-front - they need to vest for e.g. 4 years before they actually own the shares allocated for them. If you're asking for shares from founders at an early stage company, it'll almost always imply they'll need to hire you or the startup's capital structure will feel sketchy to investors.

Also, you need to make sure the founders can be trusted. Whoever with majority control of the company can decide to dilute only "someone else's" shares at the next fund raising.

You can have infinite copies but you can only transact it once - you use one of your copies and all the others are invalidated.

Technical skills *alone* is not valuable, correct. But if you find ways to ensure whoever coming to your website will generate new users and stay (virality factor) and also grab publicity at the right moment, and you understand what "right moment" means instead of naively going to TechCrunch while your website's fundamental design is not all that viral and not all that usable (e.g. the Color app that got $41M in investments) - then, only then, will you have some chance of success.

In short, it's all about execution, and most people think it's simple.

While you're saying all these things are bullshit, quite a few people made billions and thousands if not tens of thousands made millions. Businesses (e.g. Nokia, Borders) that can't follow are seeing a hit in real revenues, people are fired, and whole companies are going belly up.

You may think all these are bullshit, but to the investors, entrepreneurs and all related newly minted rich; or the newly fired people from older companies - the effects are very real.

Maybe if you see your personal wealth as an optimization problem, and thus if you're doing consumer software - things like traction, user experience, virality as optimization problems - you'll begin to appreciate the complexities inherent in building successful products (which can look deceptively simple, but the reasoning behind something simple can be very complicated) and by extension, companies that actually work well instead of "work" like a Dilbert comic strip.

I can understand the left-leaning and socialists among Slashdotters will hate what I just said. But at the end of the day, whatever technological and scientific advance you or I made have to serve human interests. You can't say "I like to do [math|quantum mechanics|machine learning|art|product design|rockets|science fiction|...] because it's fun" without "I".

But you need to take the Shadowdancer prestige class to Hide in Plain Sight.

They should go Dr. Evil and demand one million dollars *checks back with Number 2*, sorry, one hundred billion dollars.