That would end abuses quickly and all of a sudden the "shortage" would disappear when it becomes more costly to get and keep an H1B then hire a local.
I think that they'd just demand MORE visas be made available.
And they'd still be claiming a "shortage" because they cannot find the talent they need at the price they want to pay.
This link might work better for you.
http://www.huhcorp.com/
Because nothing says "the future" like having to run scripts to see anything on their page.
Dense urban grids. Self-driving vehicles. Flexible workspaces.
Sentence.
Fragments.
So this was just some slashvertisement to run up Ideo's page count? I'm not waiting for their site to load whatever-it-is that it was trying to load.
Is he saying we might end up in a fight with [China|Russia]?
Because if he is not then we'd be better served spending that money trying to stabilize the mid-east. And re-building our own infrastructure.
In my experience (as a dev team lead and interviewer) foreign workers are generally more educated, more productive and more willing to got the extra mile than the local self-entitled bunch.
Well, unless you secretly work for Google or some such, this is not about you. They're the ones who can afford to attract the best people from around the world.
The other people claiming to be in tech usually mean H-1B visa recipients. And the real reasons to hire them are:
1. They're cheaper than hiring US citizens.
2. They cannot change jobs as easily as US citizens. No matter how many hours you demand that they work.
3. They're easier to dispose of. You just send them back home. No need to worry about wrongful termination suits or such.
If you cannot afford to hire the people with the training necessary then you need to look at your business plan.
Complaining that the local people who will take the job at the pay you're offering lack the education necessary says more about your pay than about the skills of the local people.
Isn't the most common scenario for these enterprises where the programmer's customers grow beyond his ability to support just by himself?
So he starts adding people to handle the portions that he cannot, efficiently, handle himself.
If you're going into this wondering what the "ratio of senior programmers to intermediate and junior programmers" should be then I think you've skipped too many steps.
The same with "different tools and/or languages". The 2nd programmer uses exactly what the 1st programmer uses. The idea is to provide support for the founder so he can focus on what he is good at.
I'm thinking that there should be some mechanism for funding X scholarships in STEM for X visas of the H1B1 type.
Corporations receive 100 H1B1 visas this year, then 100 STEM scholarships are also provided this year. Funding via taxes on those corporations.
At least it would make it easier to graduate in a STEM field without the massive debt.
My first question is what needs to be allowed in order for this to work? Do I have to whitelist sites in adblock? NoScript? Do I have to abandon those addons?
What about any of the anti-tracking stuff I use?
And, lastly, the main reason I use all of that is because I got very tired of clicking on a site and WAITING FOR ALL THE SHIT TO LOAD AND RELOAD AND RERELOAD.
I might use this. I might not. But there isn't enough information available right now to tell whether it will be better or worse for me than what I'm doing today.
There are, probably, several alumni who are employed by those companies who would not want to see the publicity of their high prestige alma mater taking a public stand against their business.
Sorry, kids. Part of the attraction of Harvard is the business/political connections it gives you.
My guess is that someone important was scammed OR the money got to the level of "important" for the banks. This has got to be one of the easiest things that the FBI could track and bust.
A related question, though. As anyone who's ever done support knows, the average computer is awash with problems. How different would the situation have been if the scan had been real instead of a scam?
As you can see, it was pretty much along party lines.
One can fix an engine or even put it together the other designs it.
I think that, in this case, it is more like someone trained to change your oil at one of those 5 minute places.
Someone working there CAN move on to bigger things, but it won't be because that training taught them how.
However, I still say it's correct that even on the basis of a small sample, you can rule out claims about the background population.
You can say that but you are wrong.
With a small, non-random sample you cannot say ANYTHING about anything.
You reach in, grab a ball at random and pull it out, and see that it's red.
Random is not the same as non-random.
A small sample size that is random is NOT THE SAME as a small sample size that is non-random.
It's trivially true that "any small sample is going to have some non-random attributes", but that doesn't mean the sample itself isn't random,
...
Again, your sample was not random.
No matter how many times you try to imply/claim that it was random, it was not random.
Some Slashdot commenters have shown that they need an article about basic statistics, more specifically what can be inferred even from a small sample.
There are lots of people out there (and here) who do not understand basic statistics. Bennett Haselton is one of them.
The FIRST problem is not the small sample set. It is that the small sample set is "some people on Amazon's Mechanical Turk who are willing to take a survey for $X". His sample set is flawed.
And his home-written "survey" is also flawed.
So his math is meaningless. Garbage-in, Garbage-out.
In order to deal with the flaw in his sample set he'd have to have a much larger sample set. OR a properly selected sample set.
THEN he'd need his "survey" re-written.
And only then could he try his hand at the math. He hasn't even explained what his margin of error is or which method he used to calculate it. BECAUSE HE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND STATISTICS.
"It is better to have tried and failed than to have failed to try, but the result's the same." - Mike Dennison
