While I agree with @Pseudonymous Powers and I agree that immigrants can be wonderful people, it's not that simple. H1-B has been monopolized by Indian headhunter companies, in IT for years. Past administrations on both sides have found lots of fraud. I was in IT for 20 years and have been laid off, when one of those companies took over the entire IT department. Then later, I've worked for them. Initially H1-B was meant for "highly skilled workers" that we didn't have in the U.S. and it was specifically not supposed to replace American workers with cheaper foreign labor. Hence a minimum salary of $60k was set in 1989. Multiple bipartisan efforts were made to update that but all were buried in subcommittee never to be voted on. Through those Indian companies IT has largely become professional gig work as many jobs are contract. Interviews have become much harder as they expect you are an exact fit for jobs. I suspect that there is couching or direct answers when those Indian head hunter firms are involved. One reason is that I tutored an Indian women in IT that had so little knowledge as to astound me she got the visa; She admitted her last job was HR, and that it was her first IT role. She couldn't have passed the interview I had. Even if you forget about the fraud, and replacing American workers, there is still huge security issues. I saw that personally, Indians without clearance accessing a government database. It was a low security one, but still had a clearance requirement that was not met. I read recently that an executive of one of the major Indian companies got caught selling data to the Russians. Who would be surprised at this? With H1-B came Indian managers and Indian workers rights (or lack thereof). Forget about American minorities in IT, much of IT in the U.S. isn't done by American's at all. Lastly, some competition is good, but between being locked into a company for years because of fear of visa not being renewed, and probably cultural norms, no one takes much responsibility or stands up to management. I wouldn't want to guess at the technical debt in the U.S. All this makes security much worse e.g. personal security issues, technical debt issues, under qualified personnel, failed deadlines and over promised results, metric manipulation

I used to have lots of faith in "trusted" sources but I have less now than I ever did.

Some of it is the Sinclair Broadcast Group following Murdoch's example of intentionally biasing news. Some is the President/FCC being used to punish by disallowing sales. I've read that countries that have publicly funded but independent public news tend to have healthier democracies and that makes some sense to me. My biggest problem wish even "trusted" sources is that it seems polarized too. There is no nuance; so they seem to be painting a biased picture as well.

on H1-B, news doesn't mention that

1. It was for "highly skilled" workers we didn't have in the U.S.

2. Specifically never meant to replace American workers with cheaper foreign labor. That's exactly what it does in IT (why else would it be mostly Indian workers)

3. The minimum salary of 60k set in 1989 in accordance with 1 and 2. It has never been raised.

4. The fraud and lowering of workers rights by Indian head hunter companies. One girl I was training, didn't know basic computer skills and confessed that her former job was HR.

5. That in IT companies employ mostly Indian H1-B (or former), whether directly or indirectly (some IT departments are completely outsourced to Indian Head Hunter companies.)

6. H1-B workers can't change jobs easily so can be abused.

7. It's a security issue. I've seen H1-B access a government database without authorization. It was a low security, but required at least 3 years in the U.S. to get the government authorization.

Some of this used to be reported on but mostly before 2016. I've heard NPR mention H1-B when talking about the wall and illegal immigration without further context. Others just talk about the Indian workers that might be affected by any push-back to the abused program, without considering middle-aged U.S. workers that can no longer find a decent job with decent pay/benefits like affordable health insurance. Only recently higher universities like Rice and others have talked about getting low pay for IT graduates. Keep in mind these were the last to be affected.

Another topic is wind power. I'm for it, but I did some research on my own about birds they kill. They do kill birds, but it's not a they shouldn't be used, it's a mitigation issue to me. In the Netherlands, i think, They made the blades striped, and that helped allot from what I read. There were several other methods that we don't use that seemed to help but again, this wasn't in regular daily type news.

Locally, There really isn't any news that's critical or investigative into my cities politics or policies and there really needs to be.

The financial incentive is not there for good investigative, unbiased news anymore. Of course, sensationalism has always been a problem

This happens all the time. Legal definitions get changed to no longer reflect the dictionary definition. I still remember when news organizations had to walk back on editorials calling trump a traitor for the Ukrainian extortion racket, because lawyers were mentioning how the legal definition was very narrow. Too me, unless you are specifically referring to the law, you should be able to say a dictionary definition term without fear of reprisal, even if it's an opinion.

"Charities" by the IRS definition aren't necessarily "charitable" by people's understanding of the term. Insider trading is legal, if there isn't a financial quid pro quo, from my understanding. I'm no lawyer so correct me if wrong but I remember listening to a story that basically said as much e.g. I think, if an executive tells a friend information without getting anything back (except maybe similar info from the friend, sometime later) then they aren't criminally pursued. Again, if someone knows exactly, it would be interesting to learn even if wrong.

Even, if I'm not correct in my examples, I know there are tons out there. They corrupt laws. One is by changing definitions and another is by using laws meant to protect people against them or for corporations (e.g. 14th amendment/corporate personhood)

I don't know much about that cameras but that's scary.

Let me know when the class action starts.

I did "request" deletion and have as much proof, as was possible; so ...yeah.... I'm guessing maybe I can get a cheap lunch out of them, maybe not, but might as well try as they use my dna without permission

H1-B has replaced American workers for cheaper foreign labor in IT, which it was "specifically" never meant to do. Corporations for years claimed there were not enough "skilled" American labor, but in reality, it was really only a shortage of workers willing to work at low pay. A minimum of 60K was the only protection against this, but that rate was set in 1989, and has never been raised. There wasn't a shortage, but there probably is now. I'm a genx'r with ~20 years in IT, but I can't do it anymore, and I'm not really wanted. Not because I don't know anything, but because it's mostly contract, and mostly Indian now for low pay, long hours, and little to no benefits. Also, because of H1-B fraud, resumes basically have to exactly match what they want i.e. if you weren't doing the same exact job yesterday, you're not what they want i.e. plug'n play. That and my age. They want young H1-B workers that are stuck for 5-7 years until they get a green card. There is very little "American" IT left in America, except the H1-B workers with 7-10 who are now citizens. Forget about women and minorities in IT, there aren't any natively born Americans. I'm not anti-immigrant, but Indian IT companies, along with "American" corps, have made IT the first professional gig work. In my mind, it's just the first.

I'm surprised this guy was caught. I firmly believe Indian firms tell applicants what to say in an interview, much of the time. One reason, is because I had to train an Indian girl that not only didn't know the job skills, but really didn't know computers. I asked, and she told me this was her first IT job, the last job she had was HR. Even though I didn't mention it, others on the team went out of her way to tell me she mispoke or I missheard. It was weird. I didn't bring it up to any management or anything but I definately got "push back", without doing any pushing on my own. Anyway, there is no way she passed the same interview I had, on her own; we weren't at different levels.

Lastly, later I did bring up a security breach because I didn't want to be complicite and lose my "career". They had been using and accessing a government DB without clearance. It was low level clearance, but it did require at least 3 years in the country and they didn't have that. As far as I know, nothing came of it. This was a top 10 U.S. bank.

Yeah, from what I've read, our leader admires those with more power and/or wealth than he has. e.g. Xi, Putin, and Kim. Yes, I know, that as the leader of the U.S., he has lots of international power/leverage, but he doesn't, yet, have the control over "his" country like they do. I honestly, don't see him stepping down when time, if he's still here. I mean, he is running up on 80, but who knows. From when we had science, I believe, genetics was the most deciding factor in lifespan.

Yeah, that make sense. You can find shopping results (those that can pay google) but not older manuals or info.

Sounds good to me. I haven't researched it, as it was taking me too long to do normal research. Just started using perplexity. It took me too long to try it. At least, I did get brave ai results, that sometimes helped, but it still has the same problem the search engine has and can pick up only a word are two and give me completely erroneous results

I just don't believe search engines work that well anymore. Of course, we are moving to AI. It actually works, more than not. If search engines still worked and allowed syntax still, then I would be able to use normal search engines, but that's gone because google killed it, maybe bing helped... but all other searches including the ones I used (ddg) use their results, so they don't work either.

I would argue your point. From what I've read, the police are the ones with the footage, and it can be very difficult to obtain (fox guarding the hen-house type of thing). I don't know the stats, but given that, I would assume it's used more against defendants than police. Yes it makes headlines when it's used to prosecute an officer, but that's when the defense attorney can attain the footage, if they were wearing one, and if they didn't shut it off.

:) I always picture the orange man and his in front of a mirror when he/they say stuff like "Fake News" and "Lies"; then it makes perfect sense.

Of course authoritarian/totalitarian governments don't want any reality, other than the one they are "selling"

He campaigned on inflation and lowering taxes. This China Tax will increase inflation and will be a highest tax for most of us, as those of us that aren't rich, buy many products that, if not Chinese, have Chinese parts/production in their supply chain. Lastly, he did it so very badly. Tariffs are most effective, when you work with other countries, well he's pissed all of our allies off, so we have MUCH less leverage.

Unless you watch "faux news entertainment". Billionaire propaganda at it's best or worst depending on your point of view.