Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

cloud.app.box.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 221 posts

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#101

Post by chvid »

0xC0DECAFE2020 wrote: post #29
jondubois wrote: post #18

I don't know what Americans are protesting about. I don't agree with the bans at all but at least you have a president who is true to his words for once - For me that is a higher moral value. You have to take the good with the bad. I don't agree with Trump on a lot of things but I can respect a politician who does what he says he'll do. It's a refreshing break from the typical Washington charlatans who don't do anyth…

Says it all that you make a good point and are still getting down voted. This industry is very nervous about something and it's my belief it has more to do with what's coming next.

What would that be (that is coming next)?

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#102

Post by fennecfoxen »

aub3bhat wrote: post #96
fennecfoxen wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- At many smaller US airports, this is more convenient overall. There is no overhead from running a special "international" section, detached from the rest of the terminal facilities like restaurants and lounges and toilets, and US-border-style security for people going back and forth between the two: you just have everyone go through immigration straight after getting off the plane and you're done with it. Unlike Eu…

The WTC PATH Terminal is brilliant infact unlike the boring Penn Station/ Port Authority Bus Terminal, its a piece of architecture fitting to the reputation of the city for next century. You can't complain about Port Authority and then deride the new PATH station in same argument.

The terminal is pretty. But it was 10 years behind schedule. It costs $3.75 BILLION dollars to build, making it the world's most expensive transportation hub. And it runs about 46,000 passengers a day. (Compare and note that Grand Central does five and a half times that many).

It was not worth it.

Even the director of the Port Authority (the one in 2015, not the one when it was approved) declined to hold an opening ceremony because he was troubled at the cost overruns, decrying the station as a "symbol of excess".

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#103

Post by Cthulhu_ »

downandout wrote: post #73

While I disagree with the travel ban, let's remember that the primary objection that the tech industry has to it is that it will disrupt the flow of cheap talent that it uses to boost its multi-billion dollar profits at the expense of US-educated engineers that would demand higher salaries and benefits. This group of companies may not garner much sympathy.

I have a (related) counterpoint. The real problem is that there just aren't that many good US-educated engineers. This boils down to the US's weird college system, where either parents have to save up for their children's tuitions, or the people have to be lucky to get a scholarship.

The US is not a land of equal opportunity when it comes to education, which is costing a lot of potential talent to be lost. There's some improvement in 'free' online courses, but that's still only a patch next to a formal education.

If the US would invest more in its people and their educations, they wouldn't need as much foreign talent.

(spreading work out over the country instead of focusing it in SF would also help)

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#104

Post by Cthulhu_ »

celticninja wrote: post #61
coldtea wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "pathological lying"? He is no more lying than the average politician, and maybe less.

What about his statements on the crowd sizes? He also said Mexico was going to pay for the wall and that doesn't look like it will happen at all.

"alternative facts" ;). At least those err, factual inaccuracies didn't have anything to do with formal government policy.

As for the wall, he's making steps to that at least; whether they'll work on a practical matter is of course something else. Can't accuse him from not following up on his promises, anyway.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#105

Post by Chris2048 »

deanCommie wrote: post #85
downandout wrote: post #73

While I disagree with the travel ban, let's remember that the primary objection that the tech industry has to it is that it will disrupt the flow of cheap talent that it uses to boost its multi-billion dollar profits at the expense of US-educated engineers that would demand higher salaries and benefits. This group of companies may not garner much sympathy.

I don't know where you get your information, but at the kind of top-tier tech companies that are being discussed here, H1B employees are not getting inferior benefits. And as someone that does a lot of hiring I can guarantee you that the interviewing costs, relocation costs, and language barrier trade-offs do not make up for any salary differences that may or may not occur. We're not talking about some low-tech banks…

> H1B employees are not getting inferior benefit

Techtopus involved well payed engineers (google, Apple etc), yet it still kept wages down unfairly; Even if the H1B workers are paid the same, that might be enough to prevent natural wage rises.

Furthermore, I'm not sure they are: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13552944

> These are companies that have a high enough bar for entry that they truly cannot hire by looking only locally and must consider the entire world.

> Furthermore, your whole implication that the companies care about this from primarily a financial point of view is deeply cynical

How much would it cost to either train local talent, or compete with other wealthy companies for limited talent? I find "we hire only the best, we need to scour the world" to be at odds with there being no financial benefit in skimming the cream off large foreign populations.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#106

Post by Cthulhu_ »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #23
jondubois wrote: post #18

I don't know what Americans are protesting about. I don't agree with the bans at all but at least you have a president who is true to his words for once - For me that is a higher moral value. You have to take the good with the bad. I don't agree with Trump on a lot of things but I can respect a politician who does what he says he'll do. It's a refreshing break from the typical Washington charlatans who don't do anyth…

> I can respect someone who does what he says he'll do The point of a leader is to do what's right, not what's popular. Short-circuiting our republic into a direct democracy defeats its purpose.

Then the US should overhaul its voting system completely; when you have just two parties, and when the head-of-state is a person (instead of a commission or a government without a clear leader), you will inevitably end up in a popularity contest, a contest of personalities. "What's right" is much harder to get people to vote for.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#107

Post by wiz21c »

downandout wrote: post #73

While I disagree with the travel ban, let's remember that the primary objection that the tech industry has to it is that it will disrupt the flow of cheap talent that it uses to boost its multi-billion dollar profits at the expense of US-educated engineers that would demand higher salaries and benefits. This group of companies may not garner much sympathy.

From the brief :

>>> The Order makes it more difficult and expensive for U.S. companies to recruit, hire, and retain some of the world’s best employee

"More expensive" makes laugh... What were the profits of these companies last year ? Do they really need to shave a few thousands dollar here and there ?

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#108

Post by jamestnz »

qzervaas wrote: post #31

Does anybody know the process for these companies being involved? Did somebody ring around and organise this, or does word just get around and companies request involvement, or something else?

Last week Github hosted a meeting of tech industry heads to explore such an action, so this may have fallen out of that. News coverage seems to imply that Github invited chosen companies to participate.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-tech...

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#109

Post by Jabbles »

I don't want to dismiss the other, much larger, concerns people have with this executive order, but I want to highlight another aspect.

It further reduces the possibility of tourism to these 7 countries, due to the knowledge that if I want to go to the US, I face a much more invasive immigration check (see Norway PM), and the possibility of denied entry, which carries a lasting stigma.

Clearly tourism in Syria is not an option at the moment, but the more adventurous European could certainly want to visit Iran. And of course it was true that immigration officers could have asked about those trips before this order. Nevertheless, I feel that my choices of holiday have been affected by this order.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-33648096

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/03/former-norwa...

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#110

Post by Chris2048 »

pavanky wrote: post #89
downandout wrote: post #73

While I disagree with the travel ban, let's remember that the primary objection that the tech industry has to it is that it will disrupt the flow of cheap talent that it uses to boost its multi-billion dollar profits at the expense of US-educated engineers that would demand higher salaries and benefits. This group of companies may not garner much sympathy.

One of these is me: http://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=Twitter+Inc&job=Senior+Soft... I am closer to the higher of the salaries listed. This does not include other kinds of compensation I'll be getting. Let me know if you think I am being underpaid.

What's the average or expected salary for a senior software engineer working for twitter in SF?
Post reply on HN