Definitely. You can always visit SF, but remember that from SJ <-> SF is a series of populated cities, some of which you've heard of (e.g. Palo Alto). San Mateo is nice (great downtown), as is Foster City, parts of Redwood City, San Carlos, even Half Moon Bay.
EXACTLY. But so many of these transplants have this simplistic idea about the Bay Area, that it's SV and SF and that's about it. Oakland has an awesome tech scene (ever hear of Pandora?), and there are many, many more wonderful places to live.
Say it with me: San Francisco is NOT the same as the Bay Area.
No, most of us wouldn't be able to afford a decent home in SF proper. But SF is just one city in a large metro area, with plenty of places you would and could want to own a home. Those of you who are 20-something: the day is coming, sooner than you'd imagine, when you're going to want to raise kids. And unless you've knocked the ball out of the park and are worth $20 million, you're not going to want to raise your kids in SF anyway.
if nobody who hasn't already made it can afford to live there what happens then?
You can afford it. It's an expensive area for sure, but there is much more to the Bay Area than "Silicon Valley" (whatever that means nowdays) and SF. I see this attitude a lot among recent "immigrants": this myopic view, apparently based on experience in other, very different metro areas, that there is One Big City and a few "suburbs." Things aren't like that here, and the reason you feel so frustrated is that you barely understand the place you live.
The "great" schools in the Bay Area are pretty much exclusively in places with $1m+ house prices
Wrong. For e.g., Pleasanton has (arguably) the best public schools in the Bay Area, and you don't need to pay $1 million for a house. But you've barely heard of it, because the only places your friends talk about are Redwood Shores, Mountain View, and SF, right? Expand your understanding.
San Francisco real-estate is absurdly corrupt.
So don't live there. It's just one city in the Bay Area. See above.
giving me the ability to pursue my own dream projects for more of the time.SF and SV were built on that, and it's not possible there anymore unless you've got big investors.
Of course it's possible, and people do it all the time. More than ever, you do not need Big VC Cash to bootstrap a good startup. You could theoretically do it anywhere, but the tech-oriented population combined with the free-thinking culture will come in handy if/when your company grows.
She is not a manager. She was unsuccessful in management at Google, and if she succeeds at all at Yahoo, it will by pure luck. Her only strategy seems to be: imitate Google, and go mobile.
The only way Yahoo can survive as anything beyond a minor brand owned by Microsoft is to recruit someone with a Steve Jobs level of vision and execution. That's unlikely to happen.
* the author believes labels are about to go under
* once labels go under, there will be fewer bands, because making music takes a lot of money, and without the labels, the money just won't be there
All which is complete bullshit, of course. The labels will exist — they may be dying, but it'll be a slow death — and, more importantly, musicians don't need them. You don't need to be rich to form a band, tour, and record. Most bands don't form in order to get rich quick.
I beg to differ—if you call yourself a devops person and you don't know Ruby, you're somewhat rare. Yes, yes, python, blah blah. But most of us do Ruby, partly because that's what the most popular, widely used tools are written in (Chef, Puppet), and partly because it's an elegent and easy-to-understand language.
If you say you're devops and you don't do anything besides Bash: you're not devops.
Is there even a Perl6? Last I was paying attention, Larry Wall released a spec, everyone argued about it, a few people tried to do reference versions, and no one completed anything usable. Meanwhile, those of us who were trying to get work done moved on to Ruby (Perl's rightful heir) and Python (weird, but reasonable, I suppose).
What the hell is "San Francisco liberal?" If you actually live in the bay area (which != "San Francisco") you know this is just bullshit made up by conservative outsiders.
I don't know that they are actually even considering this. This is just a video version of an article in which some Wall St. pundit speculated that Netflix could "tighten things up." No news here, move along.