I worked as a Software Developer for a company that used the data as base for their salary negotiations and it worked quite well.
[1] https://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/en/home/statistics/work-income/...
[2] https://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfsstatic/dam/assets/6937/master
You could tell if someone was poor or rich based on that, but for comparing incomes in your cohort it was not very useful.
But the more important problem is the selection bias.
Also you're having sampling bias that's effecting levels. There's no way the median salary for a staff engineer is higher than a senior staff's. Again talk to Qi.
Stay cool.
I don't think that sounds very plausible.
There is a very wide range of salary, skill and experience in tech. A single figure is not of much use. If anything it might be ruined by the vast majority of cheap companies (i.e. outside of Google/Apple/Facebook/... )
If you go by what people say on HN, then of course everyone in software makes $300K a year and has millions in stock options (and gets 5 job offers in their inbox a week).
On top of the incorrect base salary, the information on bonuses/equity is extremely limited. The average that is listed is also incorrect.