That is how it should work in theory.

Unfortunately in practice these days, the money tends to exchange hands between investors a fair few times before it finally gets to something that will actually use it to generate work. By that time, the investment must generate an obnoxiously high return in order to satisfy all of the middlemen, which can limit who qualifies for that investment.

Which is all part of the problem with finance these days. There is a huge, bloated infrastructure of money men that are moving money around, keeping a cut, and allowing precious little of it to actually go to work, at which point the returns have to be unreasonably high. Recipe for disaster, as we've been experiencing firsthand.

I admit I chuckled a bit at "may even be testable".

I realize that particle physics must often invert the scientific premise of observe-then-theorize due to the cost of creating observable conditions, but it's kind of humorous when testability, the cornerstone of science, has to be remarked on in this fashion.

Which just goes to show how stupid and/or totalitarian their views are. It is not possible for a non-US citizen to commit treason against the US, so the implication is either they do not understand what treason is, or they think that everyone should be accountable to US law. Pretty chilling either way.

Not really a valid comparison. The apple app store is not just a storefront for apple-created products, it's a market for third party products as well. This potentially includes apps that access information about companies and products that compete with Apple.

Any right Apple has to run their app store the way they see fit must be tempered with consideration to competition law. Whether this act violates antitrust is subject to opinion (I don't feel that it is), but I do think it shows an intent by Apple to compete on grounds other than pure merit, and that's unfortunate.

What if Google retaliated by biasing apple-oriented search results to negative press, reviews, etc.? Or simply stopped building indices on Apple's sites? I think we'd all agree that's a bad thing, yet this is what Apple is dabbling with. I think Apple needs to be very careful.

This report from the ACLU of Texas pretty much sums it up. The TSBOE has always been able to abuse its power to push an agenda, but we've never seen it done this flagrantly before. This must not come to pass. We need legislation to halt these amendments immediately and reassess the Board's purview. Specifically, more checks and balances are needed to avoid the realization of personal agendas by a select few, and to allow more input into the process by the educators of our state.

Exactly. While I definitely agree that this could be a litmus test of sorts to weed out poor employers, the problem is you won't be able to determine why they didn't touch base for an interview.

That being said, I don't think there's anything you need to do to "fix" this problem. The fact of the matter is that this will simply be one of quite a few possible reasons a company doesn't hire someone. I honestly don't see this as hurting your overall chances of finding work. If it really bothers you (and I can understand why it would), then take the advice of others and create a web presence of your own.

Either way, best of luck to you. :)

Oh, I wouldn't go so far to label it a conspiracy, just an obvious conflict of interest.

The fact that they themselves sell software that benefits from the results of a study that they themselves conduct just degenerates the whole thing into the realm of the ludicrous.

Yes. Not only was the study out of context with the conclusions TFA reached (It's a study specific to FOSS Java-based projects and deployments, not FOSS in general), but the study itself isn't clear on what its objectives were. It fails to elaborate on methodologies used to conduct the examinations of projects or process, fails to elaborate on any of the security issues found, and fails to offer any comparative analysis with a successful application of the study to other projects, open source or otherwise. It reeks of FUD.

Fortify Software is not exactly a neutral party for conducting studies of the fitness of FOSS for enterprise software use. Half its Board of Directors have ties to enterprise software and service corporations like PeopleSoft, Sybase, Oracle, and Microsoft. I think I might get a second opinion.

Actually, it has nothing to do with safety, but rather the ability to defend one's liberty, and the fact that safety isn't worth the loss of liberty.

I don't think that's the issue at hand.

It isn't about disregarding an applicant's merit and favoring US citizens, it's about companies exploiting the H1B system for profit. The H1B system isn't supposed to be a facilitator of cheap labor, but it has been demonstrated that this is often exactly what it is used for, which is the concern behind TFA.

The H1B program would be fine if fair wages could be enforced. They can't, which has caused the program to be abused by unscrupulous employers.

Unfortunately, parent is correct. This isn't the first contradictory point to the *AA's claim that pirating affects their sales. They've ignored all of the other arguments, and I'm sure they'll ignore this one as well.