H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
1–10 of 39 posts
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#2Nobody needs heavy-handed censorship or directly intervene or override anything. A bureaucracy not run entirely by a computer is bound to be a failure because as long as there is some dude at the top with clearly expressed opinions those will find their way into decisions immediately.
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#3Article linked from the post is on Bloomberg
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-06/trump-s-h...
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#4Nobody needs heavy-handed censorship or directly intervene or override anything. A bureaucracy not run entirely by a computer is bound to be a failure because as long as there is some dude at the top with clearly expressed opinions those will find their way into decisions immediately.
What makes you think a computer run system won't be subject to biases (in particular of the implementors)?
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#5Isn't the H1-B program ripe with abuse? I've read dozens if not hundreds of comments here and reports from all over where teams were laid off in favor of H1-B counterparts.
If that's really the case, challenging the applications is the first deterrent to this sort of behavior. I doubt anything will eliminate 100% of the abuse but if we can cut it significantly, I'd call that a win.
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#6Nobody needs heavy-handed censorship or directly intervene or override anything. A bureaucracy not run entirely by a computer is bound to be a failure because as long as there is some dude at the top with clearly expressed opinions those will find their way into decisions immediately.
What makes you think a computer run system won't be subject to biases (in particular of the implementors)?
I agree partially - I think it's easier to audit the biases an implementor has encoded into an automated system, especially since the pressures a high-level official exerts are often verbal and unrecorded.
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#7Article linked from the post is on Bloomberg https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-06/trump-s-h...
Can we have the slashdot link replaced with this? The guidelines say to submit the original source. There's no paywall on Bloomberg.
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#8Nobody needs heavy-handed censorship or directly intervene or override anything. A bureaucracy not run entirely by a computer is bound to be a failure because as long as there is some dude at the top with clearly expressed opinions those will find their way into decisions immediately.
What makes you think a computer run system won't be subject to biases (in particular of the implementors)?
Bureaucracy isn't the promise of a system free of biases. The promise is that of a pure function: \forall a,b: a = b -> f(a) = f(b)
What's the point? The point is that there is a clear, rational audit trail for "why was this decision taken" with a computer system. You can challenge that. You can't challenge an overpaid gov admin whose primary motivating factor in making decisions is pleasing his superiors, no matter how removed.
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#9Article linked from the post is on Bloomberg https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-06/trump-s-h...
Can we have the slashdot link replaced with this? The guidelines say to submit the original source. There's no paywall on Bloomberg.
That bloomberg article was already shared and heavily discussed actually:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15646456
Re: H1-B Administrators Are Challenging an Unusually Large Number of Applications
#10Duplicate of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15646456
Lots of discussion over there.