fwiw, the AOL guy I mentioned is not apocryphal. I actually interviewed him for a job at a company i used to work for. And he made his large sum of money on straight consulting fees (a long 1.5 - 2 year gig), not stock options. As I said, he had intimate knowledge of NDIS drivers (a rare knowledge specialty) which was instrumental in forming the core of AOL's proprietary technology. He was too expensive for us - his consulting fee came out to around 500K per year and he was in no short supply of clients.
In every proffession you can find *someone* who makes bank. When I questioned the 250K claim, it was on the basis that said person made 250K because of their IT skills alone with little more than an MCSE to explain the salary. Anyone in any field who is making way above the average in their field is not doing so because of their membership in that field - i.e. their disproportianately high salary is not due to what they have in common with other practitioners in that field. Rather, the high salary is due to the fact that they are somehow atypical of the professionals in that field. Thus, in explaining the high salary for such individuals it is misleading to put forth as the explanation for the high salary mere membership in the field.
Point taken, although some of the posters could be unemployed sitting at home in their bathrobes. Plus, we should give credit to the students who are "studying" not working.