I understand you are using the logic/argument/fallacy thing, but he made two statements, neither was presented as an argument, at least in my mind. Unless he was, your just being pedantic here. Personally, I consider both true, but I'm not making an argument for anyone else.

Corporations, have used H1-B to replace American workers with cheaper foreign labor for many years. Exactly, what that bill was specifically NEVER meant to do. I was in IT for 20 years but I got caught in the Gig work that IT has become and couldn't deal with it. A minimum pay of 60K was set for H1-B, in 1989 and has never been raised, because bipartisan bills were sent to be buried in subcommittee never to get a vote. Companies abuse the program period. It's also a huge security issue. Anyone in IT should know that. I'm not anti-migrant, but H1-B is why American IT is dying (or already dead?). Huge government projects have died because of contractors..hmmm. I would tell any American collage student to steer clear of IT. Low pay, Low benefit, Long hours, Little Job to no job security and he have the most 'self' learning intensive jobs there is. Former Google CEO said IT workers forget about work/life balance. All the CEOs think that way. If your young... do something else... don't waist your life .. to be used, abused, and thrown away in IT.

"For the children" is always dubious because it tends to have authoritarian undertones (and supporters). Regardless of that, it tends to take away privacy and/or freedoms.

The Gestapo don't care about "Rights" or probable cause.

LOL Thanks!

Bills like this which have a history where politicians say, this law want ever do "X" or be a abused in 'Y' way or 'Z' will never happen. They are all liars regardless of party. Unless protections (checks/balances) are built into the law, they don't have the power or authority to enforce those claims even if they are still in office when X,Y, or Z happens. I hate, hate, hate all politicians who make those fabricated claims.(too much? ;P)

We need open standards to enable competition in tech, and most everywhere else. Personally, I wasn't referring to just ALPR. Companies/Industries have locked down standards to prevent competition/compatibility. The standards that used to be better for all of us have been taken over by industries. I haven't researched web standards, but why we can't right click anymore on many/most websites. The websites seem to have more control of our computers/browsers than they used to (it seems to me). Open standards are good for society. Imagine if there was no standard for electrical outlets or light bulbs (or no open standards). Vendor lock in, planned obsolescence... only creates limited choices, high cost and tons of waste.

I agree in principle. I'm not sure the exact way it should be done. I've thought to adjust it for inflation in the bill, but H1-B has become too bloated anyway. It is used for students as well, which it wasn't intended for. It should be trashed and new legislation should be drafted. The problem is our government is run by lobbyist, so it no longer functions. Bills often do nothing, or even the opposite of what they were originally intended as amendments destroy them. Of course in this case, they get buried in subcommittee to never see a vote, time and time again.

I love your first sentence, but it's more than just errors; it's a violation of privacy and basic human rights. Especially, as the police are just badly designed. There needs to be external oversight to police. "protect and serve" shouldn't be just a re-branding after a the police go off the rails, it should be the ideal they strive for. Unfortunately, police abuse the law and citizens daily all over the country. They work for the major who serves the biggest campaign donors. So, the last thing they do (generally) is work for most of us. Of course, we all know self-auditing never works as well as it should.

It's the fraudulent Indian contract companies that abuse the program. They helped make IT work the leading edge in professional gig work. They all should be banned in the U.S. if anyone cares about U.S. workers anymore.

Because it was originally for "Highly skilled workers", and not meant as a cheaper replacement for American workers, specifically, a minimum of 60K was set in 1989 and it has never been raised. There have been multiple bipartisan attempts but they were all buried in subcommittee never to see a vote. That 60k has been an elastic band to IT salaries for many years... H1-B needs to be completely redone.

Maybe you guys do better but most of our politicians are stupid and only care about the special interest that fund their campaigns ... they don't represent "people" at all, except those that control masive amounts of funding...i.e. the ultra rich and their hedge-funds, company executives/board members (who are also rich). Time to dump some tea overboard

I love this news because it made me laugh. Some a-hole, whether some arrogant clerk or higher up gave out the quote, who knows. (hopefully, it will come out). If the later it's trickle down from the top, as that seems to be the attitude that has proliferated public offices. This belligerence towards it's own citizens seem to becoming more normal in TX, at least those who ask uncomfortable questions or ask for help. Those in charge, seem to have zero morals and are used to pulling 'facts' out of their ends.

This includes both public and private 'charities' as well. They may meet the 501(c)(3) definition but most now are anything but 'charitable', by dictionary definition, in TX

In my mind, this type of thing should have become government funded (well, if there was a functional one) but changed to independent non-profit (BBC type of thing).

There are tons of examples of sites that were made by individuals, smaller companies, usually not large international mega-corps. Some were really only made useful by users. They end up becoming something basically a public utility (like electricity or telephone). I understand that many people would think calling them utilities is going overboard, but I don't think it is. At sometime, all utilities were luxuries and not considered necessary like they are today. To me, innovations that mostly benefit society should all become utilities just as plumbing, electricity, and telephone once did. Google revolutionized searching the web only to largely destroy the functionality/utility themselves. Reddit, allowed users to come together and fight injustices (usually companies that can screw customers because there isn't enough competition) or just find others that could give them free advice, open up an issue to a public forum full of knowledge. It was a platform that helped people, it wasn't perfect, but it was much more beneficial, than not, to society.

Inevitably, corporate interest destroy the societal benefits, sometimes all at once and sometimes it just slowly erodes them. Sometimes these 'utilities are bought out, and sometimes the corporations and/or industry interest use the courts to 'legislate' the benefits away using the judiciary (if that sounds wrong to you, you got it).. One example of the first IMDB, which utility was created by the public through ratings and reviews, then it was bought out and monetized. From what I remember it had very public APIs, I doubt they are as open as they were, if they still exist. An clear example of the second would be archive.org (including wayback machine). It was like a digital library that kept old publications, like a normal library keeps books and magazines, but unlike physical libraries it was gutted through the judiciary by lawsuits effectively creating legislation that allowed companies to destroy. An library equivalent would be companies going into the libraries and destroying old magazines and any corporate newsletters it wanted (more likely having the library itself do it under threat). Speaking of the wayback machine, the gutting of it has helped de-utilize Wikipedia because it's sources were linked to that because the original sources were 'disappeared' i.e. dead links and/or redirection. I don't know as much about why Wikipedia seems much less useful but I would guess, at least some 'judicial legislation' played a part. I used to be able to look up many domains. I once looked up a source someone used on a political issue and Wikipedia listed it as Russian owned or run. It was nice to be able to remove it as a legitimate unbiased source. I now find that questionable sites aren't listed, so I can't actually research there legitimacy or potential bias. I believe, many sites that should include include controversies just don't. I'm guessing that companies/sites can opt out or something to that effect of even being on Wikipedia. "Controversy" sections have largely disappeared. If there is a disagreement as to facts, I could follow the sources and use the knowledge to determine what the evidence actually favored and how biased the sources may or may not be. Now, I can't even check sources on most of the 'facts' on either side even if it is or was listed, regardless