Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Why study tech just to train your H1B replaceme (Score 1) 231

I'd rather have an entry-level H1B here, earning and spending money in the US (and paying taxes), than to have the same guy over in India or wherever.

(I'm sure being in India does constrain his ability to compete with my technology skills somewhat, but not enough that I can stop worrying about him.)

Since most H1-B's are entry level, not "advanced" workers at all, and we have millions of fresh grads chomping at the bit for the few entry level positions available, what sense does it make to then import people to drive down wages and increase competition for a group that can barely get employed in the first place?

Comment Re:How about... (Score 1) 231

Techies have a 3.3% unemployment rate

Split it demographically by age and you find that unemployment for "techies" north of 40 is significantly higher--closer to double the national unemployment for all industries. The problem this creates is that these are educated, skilled people who expected another 20 "high-earning" years before we put them on an ice floe.

Comment Re:That wasn't his point. (Score 2) 231

Who's to say immigration won't benefit all, or at least most citizens?

Modern history. Specifically, the scandal of H1-B abuse in this country which is used by our largest corporations to artificially deflate the market-price for high-tech labor by importing cheap foreign labor to replace Americans. The "you must exhaust all opportunities to hire an American!" rule of H1-B hiring is just a fig-leaf that these companies get around by posting a role that NOBODY meets the requirements for, then using the fact that none of the applicants met the (insane) criteria for hiring as an excuse to import a much-cheaper H1-B.

Comment Re:I have an idea (Score 1) 231

First, it doesn't steal jobs from Americans.

"Steals" jobs from Americans? really? You need to have a legal title for something for it to be stolen, which you don't.

You may fall in whatever side of the issue you might want, but using the phrase "stealing jobs from America" is just inflammatory propaganda.

Think about it.

Yes, really.

Althought "jobs" aren't actually what are being stolen: Its prosperity. And it isn't being stolen by the immigrants, but by the bloodsucking corporations that want to grind all of our pay down so low by flooding the market with third-world-educated-on-governmen-tax-dollars-so-they-don't-have-student-loans folks that we're glad--even ecstatic!--to accept third-world plus 25% wages.

It's a naked attempt to flood the market and thereby drive down wages, period.

Comment Re:That wasn't his point. (Score 2) 231

But the bigger the number, the bigger the chance that someone like them will be among them.

Of course, the corollary to this is that the bigger the number the fewer actual Americans will get an opportunity to shine, too. ...And isn't the government of this country supposed to be working int he best interests of actual citizens first?

Comment Re:How about... (Score 4, Interesting) 231

How about no STEM visas for anyone? Instead, throw the effort at growing these folks at home

Could the mod who moderated "flamebait" on this please anonymously post justification? We have 20 million unemployed, many of them techies over 40 who can't get a call back because the employer prefers cheaper (pronounced "younger") people who don't have as many family complications and the expectations of good benefits (like health insurance and pension/401k match.)

It seems to me that it is a perfectly legitimate point of view, and not an invitation to flaming, that we shouldn't be importing something we already have a supply of (and the capacity to generate more of) just to depress wages. Part of the problem is the attitude that an employee must either have the sun, moon, and stars (and often in quantities that don't jive with reality--i.e. a demand for 15 years of .Net experience, for example) to earn a competitive salary (i.e. one that would entice you to leave your current job) or be willing to work so cheaply that the employer would be foolish not to pay for a little training to "catch them up" on the job.

Comment Re:Speaking of "Smear Campaigns"... (Score 3, Interesting) 513

"Reading" implies a "person reading your email."

No, it does not.

In this context it clearly is intended to imply a person is reading it: The advertisement and smear campaign aren't related to "linux manuals pages"--it is directed at an audience that would unquestionably infer that their messages were being "read" by a person.

It's a disingenuous lie to say they're being "read" by a person because they aren't. It is even more disingenuous because what Google is doing is "parsing" the messages, not reading them, and achieves galactic levels of hypocrisy when you realize Microsoft's cloud services parse your email too.

Comment Re:Speaking of "Smear Campaigns"... (Score 2) 513

My email providers don't.

Really? Are you aware that SMTP transactions are, at heart, a parsing of your message? That an automated program is parsing through the message to figure out where the headers end and the body begins? To do this they must parse the message.

So if they're not parsing your email, how is it being delivered? Osmosis? Telepathy? Carrier pigeon?

Comment Re:semantic analysis in the future (Score 4, Insightful) 513

Google might even change it's policy and let humans read your e-mails.

So might Microsoft in their cloud hosting service! ...Your point?

You gave them permission. How do do you know what google will do int he next ten years?

Once again you gave the same permission to Microsoft, specifically the clause that lets them change TOS at will with your only recourse being to stop using the service.

Maybe some credit agency will pay them $100 per user account to see all your e-mails.

Mean while microsoft is actually promising in their user agreement that they will never ever do that to you. There's thus a big difference.

Of course, that same user agreement also give Microsoft the option of changing those rules at their convenience, and the burden is on you to discover the change, not on them to reveal it.

Comment Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score 1) 209

The more you know about someone the easier it becomes to ruin them. Imagine a world where any sufficiently motivated extortionist could have their pick of targets. Eventually those extortionists would infiltrate whatever system was overseeing the information aggregation

It gets worse: An infiltration wouldn't even be needed--a successful extortionist could simply use his profits from the previous extortion attempt to BUY access to the data since these databases would undeniably be "commercialized" by some scum-bag looking to make a quick buck.

Comment Re:Amazon knows me better than myself . . . ? (Score 1) 209

In the hands of some ideally benevolent government, all data may be benign. In the hands of a despotic one, it can be used to detect and eliminate any and all opposition - a witch hunt to end all witch hunts.

And when you factor in the "transnational" status of our world's largest corporations (i.e. they aren't "American," "British," or "French" companies anymore but "multinationals") the number of governments that you could be targeted by is essentially unlimited, since corporations have no conscience (by definition they don't: They aren't living things) they'll sell the product to anybody they can legally sell to that has money to spend.

Had a conversation about this recently and was pretty shocked at the apathy. Granted, I was talking to a Facebook addict at the time, but its shocking how little people think about what permanent records exist of their private lives.

Comment Re:It's even worse (Score 4, Informative) 826

I'm paying 10% more (roughly) in income taxes now than i was three years ago, with no rise in income. President's fault!

There are a lot of Obama-hating Bullshit Artists on here today: Obama didn't raise taxes, so what did you change? Did you pay off a large mortgage that gave you a large tax deduction? Did you stop donating to charity? The rates are (literally) IDENTICAL to what they were when he took office, so you're either lying or omitting a crucial detail.

Slashdot Top Deals

"'Tis true, 'tis pity, and pity 'tis 'tis true." -- Poloniouius, in Willie the Shake's _Hamlet, Prince of Darkness_

Working...