What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
34 Comments
- dotMH, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8So what kind of features does this new VERSION of GROWTH have? new gui perhaps? Can we get a comparison between growth 1.0 and growth 2.0? Why wasn't I informed when the PUBLIC BETA came out?!
stop using the bloody "2.0" on things that has nothing to do with versions! Make sense, not war! - mrknowitall137, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Negative Nancy
Technology is advancing way faster now then in 2001, and the jobs now are more secure then the start ups of before. We are short on engineers, but I would rather have a shortage then a surplus, and have more people sitting at home unemployed. - KarbonKopy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Anyone else sick and tired of everyone using 2.0 as a tag line?
- argoff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think it is not well understood that there are two forces pushing the market in the Valley. 1) The massive growth of technology, 2) The massive inflation of money (indirectly via the Federal Reserve Bank loaning money into the economy). #1 is good, #2 is bad. In theory the hope is that the good will cancel out the bad, but the problem is that it won't. In a high tech, high efficiency economy, monetary abuses lead to MORE extreme reactions, not less extreme ones. The money will be sucked into the economy with high efficiency, and then will be spit out with high efficiency when the economy becomes over saturated in debt. That means they are pre-destined to have massive inflation, massive defaults, and serious economic panics all in a short time span.
During the late 1800's, the industrial revolution made things so much cheaper that prices were pushed down for a period of nearly 50 years. But the shrinking profit margins and pay worked out OK, because there was limited debt and prices went down faster than pay. Now computer technology is forcing the same thing, but the only problem is prices will skyrocket because they keep pumping money into the economy, and that massive defaults will happen because peoples pay will never be able to keep up with their debt. How ironic that in a such high tech economy, people would be so wise to stock up on low tech things such as guns, food, and gold. - drakethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Good news considering how people were talking about land prices being too high for any real growth. I guess they were wrong cause 33,000 is still a decent number. However, compared to the growth NEEDED this is nothing. I know that in retrospect a company like Google probably wants to hire 30,000 people itself given a year or maybe less. They can't however because despite blaming the Indians, their aren't enough Americans to fill the positions unless they are under qualified for the job.
- EthylAdded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You can find these "jobs" deconstructed at http://www.viewfromsiliconvalley.com/id296.html
- benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+233,000 jobs is larger than the population of Menlo Park. Silicon Valley is pretty intimate for a world business center, 33,000 is plenty.
- hobbers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The problem with this new job growth is the insane growth of real estate prices. I obtained an entry level professional job in silicon valley in 2005, and I can't afford to buy anything to live in. Anywhere else in the country, and I'd be living like a king. Now that the love affair is over with my first job and breaking into the industry, I'm looking to move out of silicon valley as soon as possible.
Sure, silicon valley is fun and has a certain amount of glamor to it. But at the end of the day, I have to pay the bills. And the bills are WAY cheaper elsewhere. - mweels, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2KarbonKopy i was just commenting on that!!! You guys are lame!
- rasp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I live and work in the valley and it's been a noticeable boom for the last 6 months, at least.
- smellinator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's definitely time to move on to version 2.0 of the 2.0 tag line.
- benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yes. very.
- dotMH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[insert witty reply that starts with "[insert..." here]
- roberto_deneero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The bad news is that 32,999 of the 33,000 jobs have been created at McDonald's thanks to Bush-onomics. More jobs, yes, but the "good jobs" are still overseas with our money and our troops. Bush 2.0 is about to burst...get ready for Billary 2.0 and the return of good times in America!
- digitalbryan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's about time! I know of consulting companies that had to switch to recruiting health care people in 2003 because there weren't any IT jobs. I don't believe these companies that say no qualified engineers exists to fill current job openings.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Google only employs about 7,500 people total.
- echoforever, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3That would ultimately mean growth 2.0 for India as well.
- mpaci1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3But with San Jose's population at close to one million alone, 33,000 new jobs is pretty tame. Pair that with the overall exodus of people and jobs the previous years post dot-bust, the 33k doesn't sound all that great. But hey, it's a start.
- KarbonKopy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I knew I wasn't the only one :)
- benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1oh god here we go again... (and i agree with you too, but this isn't the place)
- natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why has it been so easy to get tech jobs if we've supposedly had issues since 2001?
- neatflux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Aw common guys, they are just trying to get a rise out of us. :)
- Dissonance, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes but the Bay Area as a whole has a population of over 8 million.
- benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1its getting smuggier to say the least...
- noisebleed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Traffic on 101.
- hobbers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"noticeable" ... How so?
- ChrisJP, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I buried this after seeing 2.0 in the title, marked it inaccurate. I hate how one can simply add a 2.0 suffix to literally anything just to give it at least 100 times greater chance of having it hit the homepage. Applying version numbers to real life developments is a pointless exercise as it has absolutely no relevance.
I'll expect this comment will get dugg down, but if enough people ignore this 2.0 phenomenon then it should wipe out the problem, hopefully. - Shatneresque, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Man, you're getting dugg down like crazy, and yet that's the best analysis in this whole thread.
- benijuana, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1there has been traffic on 101 since the beginning of time. Thats why you take 280...
- dsmythe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's all in where you look (for tech jobs)....
But that's ok, whatever progress there is will soon be reversed by all the new taxes that will be imposed over the next year or two. The state has a massive "$7.6 billion shortfall in the 2006 budget ($1 billion worse than Davis’ worst year in 2000). His proposed 2007 budget adds $1.9 billion more to the state’s ocean of red ink."
yay big government! - meshman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0[Insert usual rant that "Web 2.0" doesn't exist here]
[Insert bonus rant about how everything's going to be "2.0" for no reason now] - modernista2001, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0... today is Web - 20 Celsius, in Canada
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1People vote me down, but they understand I'm right :)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Soon to become burst 2.0
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is