explainthisth

These claims have very little in common with the facts on the ground. A Google engineer can afford a condo five miles away in Sunnyvale ($700k), or a house ($1M) if they have a partner earning decent money too. These prices are absurd, and untenable for regular people who don't work in tech, but let us be realistic. Those are the prices because there are people paying them.

Because the visas are distributed by lottery, and the largest number of applications are filed by Isfosys-type spammers. People with >$130k jobs in SV are being denied due to the $70k body shops spamming the lottery. If the spam goes away, those non-spam applications become a more reliable proposition.

This decision is not relevant to something like an AWS instance in the EU.

Whether it is "your problem" or "their problem" depends on what you can do about it.

Have you tried offering internationally competitive salaries?

I'm really curious how this revocation of visas works in combination with the 90-day limit on the executive order. If the executive order is not extended, can they be un-revoked?

I'm not saying it's morally right or wrong. I'm just saying the set of people that get H1B visas will change, and the shift will be toward higher-end jobs.

Because it will become easier to import someone who is more qualified.

It should make it easier for Americans to get the jobs Infosys is hiring for at $70k, and harder for Americans to get jobs from Google at $250k.

The most economically productive businesses are located in the most expensive areas, because they get the highest ROI from hiring top employees. Skilled workers get paid less in MS because the national economy needs skilled workers less in MS.

How do you figure? Right now, consulting companies spam the lottery with shitty jobs. With the new system favoring quality $130k+ jobs there will be a bigger supply of good H1Bs to compete with.

I'm very unsure about this, but thinking maybe I should hurry and buy a house if this passes.

VC subsidy or no, a car service with the medallion capital cost will end up costing more than one without.

I know people at the first two companies who work in SF. Not sure about the rest of the list.

These police are employed by the DC city government, which is run by Democrats.

Link to arrests of journalists which took place before Trump was president: https://www.google.com/search?q=dc+metro+police+arrest+journ...

While Trump's views on the First Amendment are disturbing, these arrests do not seem related.

That's not great evidence on where poor people are more likely to stay poor. You'd want to pick a level of purchasing power that counts as poor, a level that counts as not poor, and measure how many people moved between those levels.

Trump seems pretty unstable if you believe the leaks from the White House: https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/us/politics/donald-tru...

How about this? https://www.amazon.com/Philips-Light-Works-Amazon-Alexa/dp/B...

5mph when passing? I hope they ticket runners too.

While we're being condescending, it seems like some people have Zuckerberg derangement syndrome. Guess Aaron Sorkin's quasi-fictional biopic was effective. I don't see how anyone who reads this article will think Zuckerberg is hurting anybody. A bunch of people who previously owned useless fractional shares are going to get some cash.

The evidence "group A was hired more than than group B, and the effect was statistically significant" doesn't imply we should find a significant effect when comparing any other set of groups A, B, ~A, C, C^B, etc.

It's generally hard to prove things with statistics without a randomized experiment.

I hope your anonymous interview system can authenticate applicants properly. Because we get cheating attempts in the online screening test we use for hiring. Recently, we got five submissions from recent grads of universities around the country. They were modified trivially (with different indentation and variable names) but clearly drawn from the same work. There is no way of knowing if someone was hired to do the test, and didn't share the results. We have also gotten people in on-site interviews who were not the same as the person in the phone interview.

This could be easily explained in a lot of ways. Here's an example that makes sense intuitively to me: popular conception of Oracle among Bay Area locals I know is that they are money-grubbing assholes (similar reputation to an investment bank or something). They may attract a set of applicants that will negotiate aggressively and only accept high salaries. I'm white and I can sure as hell say I wouldn't work at Oracle for market rate. This effect may be correlated with race due to the way ideas travel through social groups, and immigration status.

I think this is at least as plausible as "bias" to explain why white applicants would be hired less and paid more.