Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Unionize (Score 1) 350

What employers say they need and what they want are not the same thing. Employers have said they want certain skills but then they bring in H1B's with the same or inferior skills as their American counterparts. What employers really want from H1B's is cheap labor that is compliant and they get that because the H1B's they sponsor have no leverage. They have to accept whatever the employer decides with no recourse except to be sent home. If the employers were really just seeking skills they cannot find here then they'd be happy to allow the H1Bs to be free to leave for other employers or negotiate a better salary. H1B's are a distortion of the labor market because the H1B's are indentured servants. Eliminate that and let's see what the market brings us. Our current regulations and rules don't work. It's too easy for the employers to gave the system or outright lie.

Comment Re:Unionize (Score 5, Insightful) 350

A lot of the rules you're asking for exist, but they aren't enforced. Lawyers put together some plausible but incorrect statements and file them with authorities who aren't eager to check them out. There are videos on the internet showing various lawyers and clients conspiring to do this. To top it off, most in Congress are more loyal to the executives in the IT industry demanding higher quotas then they are to common people. Even when it's been demonstrated that these executives, Bill Gates included, are lying through their teeth about the salaries they pay the H1B's. Your last suggestions hint at a better solution and that is to remove employer sponsorship and control from the H1B process and the visa award completely. H1B holders should be able to change jobs at will and compete for whatever salaries they can get. Currently H1B holders are cheap and compliant due to the fact that they can't change jobs and it is that which makes them so appealing to employers. Free the H1B's and then they will only be valued based on their skills and productivity.

Comment Re: Vietnam (Score 2) 282

Aren't you just providing the details behind his assertion? The US was not willing to prosecute total war in order to win and it lost the will to fight a protracted guerrilla campaign. The British won their war in Malaysia using more overwhelming numbers and cutting off access to the villages by the guerrillas. It took about 10 years if I recall. It also takes a good 10 to 1 manpower advantage to pull this off. The US wasn't willing to make that commitment and the US population lost patience. News reports and general agitation by those opposing the war raised the public's consciousness about the war and how it was being prosecuted. (Interesting factoid, even though at the peak we had over 524000 service men and women in Vietnam, only 80,000 had direct combat roles. That' the same number the French had with only 140,000 + soldiers.) The French didn't have golf courses and pizza delivery by helicopter.

Comment How ironic Slashdotters (Score 1) 300

Except for a couple of defensive posts, it's interesting that few of the posters seem to recognize that they are part of the 13%. I'd wager that where 13% might be the share of the general population, here at /. the share - based on comments on all topics - seem to be about 70%. The year of the Linux desktop. Symbian was sooooo great. Gnome versus KDE. Zune. Apple is doomed. Google is such an innovator and friend of open source. Etc.

Comment Re:"esoteric and unnecessary" (Score 1) 196

AFTER Blackberry? Blackberry routes its messages through its own servers. It keeps copies. On a number of occasions they turned these messages over to governments when it was demanded. India was one of those countries if you want to look it up. Apple's work in this area includes 1) the encryption of data that Apple itself cannot break, 2) reducing the amount of information about you that Apple has as a result of your using their products (e.g. Apple Pay doesn't have your CC or see your transactions, 3) refusing to sell that information to third parties and 4) not allowing applications to collect data about you without your consent. Overall, that's better than Blackberry ever did. Yes, its take awhile to get this far, but they are moving in the right direction.

Comment Re: Criminal liability ... (Score 1) 82

I work for one. They aren't shams in that there is no profit for shareholders. Yes, the top execs compensate themselves very very well. I'm a top of the heap individual contributor and highly paid and our CEO still makes about 100 times I do - literally. You'd think they'd return some to the "owners" (members), but they only do that - premium adjustments - when competitive or regulatory pressures give them no choice.

Comment Re:Not just ineffective (EEO bullshit) (Score 1) 553

How is it "immoral"? First of all the law isn't against "thought" - stupid prejudice; it's about "deed" - actively discriminating against someone for reasons irrelevant to the job. We legislate against deeds all the time. Murder, for instance, is mostly illegal. You can think about murdering someone, but you can't take actions that might lead to that result, i.e. hiring a hitman, firing a gun at someone, stabbing someone in the neck with a pencil, etc.

The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent. -- Sagan