Doesn't matter, because if you had children you'd know that no one is capable of being sufficiently attentive.

As a Googler... I think this comment hits the mark, far more than any of the others.

It is not, not even then. You'd need at least three parents: One to go to work, one to stay with the kid, one to cover for the second when they have to do something other than watching the kid (clean the house, do the laundry, use the bathroom, etc.). Oh, sure, you can try to put the kid in a safe environment while you do stuff, but many young children are shockingly good at finding ways to get into stuff they're not supposed to get into, and do it far faster than you would expect.

A team of nannies can do it.

People used to live in the middle of a village of other people who watched out for their neighbors' kids when their parents had to take their eyes off of them. And kids used to die. A lot. Far more than we'd consider acceptable today.

And not just one. KIds vary widely and it's not uncommon for parents who've only dealt with a single child to assume that all kids are like that one. Usually adding a second kid is enough to open their eyes when they realize that none of what worked on the first kid works with the second and vice versa. Occasionally parents get two that are very similar and don't learn this until they have a third, or until grandkids come along, or other close exposure.

How many children have you raised? I'll bet, one. One who happened to be easy to dissuade from putting stuff in their mouth, so you have extrapolated from that sample of one to all kids everywhere.

The fact is that kids aren't all the same. Some are easy to train, some aren't.

Source: I'm a father (4X) and a grandfather. Based on my sample, I should perhaps assert that all babies and toddlers stick everything in their mouths and there's nothing you can do to teach them otherwise until they're at least two, and usually three. But I know that kids are all very different, and so I can imagine that there may be some child who can be taught not to put stuff in their mouth younger than that.

I see you don't have children.

Certainly there are differences, I was addressing pay.

One prefatory comment before I respond to the rest: I am in no way claiming that H1-Bs aren't terribly abused by many companies. I know they are; I've seen it firsthand (before joining Google). But the context of this discussion is Google, and in nearly 15 years at Google, many of them as a manager, including of H1-B holders, I have never seen any abusive behavior. Moreover, no one I know had seen or heard of any, nor would they stand for it.

If I or any other manager -- or individual -- thought that an employee was being taken advantage of for their visa status, and spoke up about it, the complaint would be taken very seriously. This has become even more true since the DEI initiatives.

No one at Google is required to work anywhere near that much, and the expectations for US citizens and H1-B visa holders are the same. 40-45 hour work weeks are the norm. Some people decide they want to work a lot more for personal reasons, or because they think it will help them get promoted (they're not wrong). Management typically verbally discourages but in practice rewards long hours.

I did that. I had a report that worked way too much. I regularly told him it wasn't healthy and he should slow down... but when it came to review time and promotion time his productivity and impact were outstanding, so he got outstanding reviews and quickly got promoted. He's now my peer and I wouldn't be surprised if he's eventually my boss, which I'd be okay with. He's a hard charger, but a good guy.

This also doesn't happen at Google. I have personal knowledge of an H1-B visa holder who filed a complaint with HR. Their complaint was acted on and they were not punished in any way.

I suppose. I've never seen anyone (citizen or not) let go for taking too many vacation days. It would definitely not happen unless they actually exceeded their allowed vacation time by more than the allowed amount (you can go one week negative). And I've never seen anyone do that. There's really no need to; the vacation is pretty generous and if you want to do something like go hike across Australia for six months you can generally get a leave of absence (unpaid) to do it.

Also, employees (regardless of visa status) are encouraged to use all of their vacation time. Performance reviews are calibrated against days worked so theoretically taking time off doesn't hurt you. In practice it can a little if your'e really gung ho for moving up the ladder, not because anyone explicitly penalizes you but because always being available makes it easier to take advantage of the opportunities to have great impact. But, again, none of this is any different for citizens vs non-citizens.

Never seen that. Complaints about work assignments in general are really rare. Google SWEs have a lot of input into what they work on, and it's pretty easy to change teams if there's nothing in your team's area that interests you.

There are some definite downsides to the bottom-up decisionmaking culture at Google; many of the dead products are directly attributable to this quirk of the company. Products get started by SWEs who think it's a good idea and manage to convince enough others around the company, so management assigns headcount to it and engineers join the product, build it out and launch it. Then if it doesn't immediately get traction (read: millions of daily users with a trajectory towards hundreds of millions) it stagnates, SWEs migrate away to projects with better growth prospects, the product becomes a maintenance burden that it's hard to keep staffed, HC is cut, then eventually the product is discontinued. Companies with top-down decisionmaking culture start with executive champions who keep them funded and growing long-term, and in that sort of culture you can just assign people to do the maintenance and that's that.

Anyway, the point is that work assignment complaints don't happen much. And to the degree they do, there's no difference in how it's handled with citizens vs non-citizens.

Nope, that is definitely not the case at Google.

Also absolutely does not happen at Google. Citizenship status or visa type has absolutely no bearing on any of that.

The biggest problem I've seen for H1-B visa holders at Google is that sometimes the government doesn't allow them to renew. In that case, what usually happens is if there's a Google office in their home country they relocate there (with applicable pay adjustment, but with a generous relocation package) where they stay for a year until they can qualify for an L-1 visa, then they move back (again with applicable pay adjustment and relocation). If there isn't a Google office in their home country, Google looks for another country where there is an office and to which they can go. The UK is apparently pretty easy, so that's a common destination. Again, they stay there for a year until they can qualify for an L-1, then they return to the US. Unless they'd rather not, of course, but they usually do.

Obviously, not everyone wants to do this "one year somewhere else" dance, so sometimes they separate. That happened to a guy on my team just a few months ago. He decided instead that with what he'd made working for Google in the bay area he could afford to take a few years off living in his home country of Vietnam, so he just quit and went home rather than move to the UK. Big loss for the team, actually. He was a brilliant engineer.

We're talking about H1-Bs, which means they're in the US, not in India. Don't be an asshole.

So population of the USA is about 340M, this claim is just under 1 in 4 people in the USA listen to AM radio. To be honest I haven't listened to the radio in my car in over a decade - am or fm. I do not know anyone that does and I am in the age demographic that would likely listen to a radio rather than stream. Does anyone under 30 or 35 use a radio in their car, I know my child never has in almost a decade of driving.

Now if the 82M includes the fact I may have turned on the AM radio in my car when I was a teen 4 decades ago - but number of people that listen to am radio now I can't believe this number

If I searched my posting history, I'm sure I could find a /. post saying exactly the same thing... except mine would have been from around 2005, and would have mentioned native games instead of Lutris/Steam, and specified Debian Linux and KDE. And GIMP. I was really into photography back then and used the hell out of GIMP. I still use it regularly, though not as much because my camera doesn't get so much use.

My point? I don't really have one, except that these sorts of predictions have a long history of proving to be wrong. Hence the forever meme "Next year is the year of desktop Linux!".

That said, I dumped Windows in early 2002 and I've never looked back and never regretted it, so Linux is and has been a completely viable platform for a long time.

Google pays the foreigners the same as it pays Americans. Maybe a little bit more, if you count the free immigration attorney work.

If just anyone could be trained up, that might make sense, but there's a big element of native talent and intelligence needed, and the US only has about 4% of the world's population. It makes a lot of business sense to look into the other 96% to see what you can find there. And its the moral thing to do, too. Kids in the US are already massively advantaged by their lucky break of being born here. Why not give others a chance?

Google actually does that except they start a little bit later, with college freshmen and sophomores.

Google pays its H1-B workers the same as US citizens, or green card holders, etc. There's no cost savings to be had there.

Wait, what?

If the operator of the windmills and the peaker plants are competitors, why would the windmill operator give up revenue to benefit the peaker plants?

If they're not competitors (e.g. in the same company), shutting down cheap power generation in favor of more expensive power generation would decrease profit, not maximize it.

I can't think of any reasonable structure in which your theory could work. What am I missing?

I should mention that although I'm an Android engineer, I don't have any significant contact with RISC-V work. The above is my interpretation of the public comments, in light of what I do know about the state of RISC-V and the way the Android ecosystem is structured and works.