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

Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

edition.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 231 posts

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#131

Post by diebeforei485 »

roywiggins wrote: post #77
compscistd wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't they offer a required in-class portion of their degree (INT 5001: "Let's Talk about COVID and being international students for 20 minutes") for all international students where completion is required for their degree but attendance is optional? Effectively, no one physically goes to the class, but it's enough to keep students in the US because it's not an online-only class.

The regulations are written so as to exclude the possibility[0]. I wouldn't play chicken with ICE. Get this wrong, and you can be held in immigration detention until ICE can convince your home country to let them deport you back[1], which may be a while considering countries have been travel-banning the US on public health grounds. [0] "For F-1 students enrolled in classes for credit or classroom hours, no more than…

The regulations will be updated (new regs will be in the Federal Register as a Temporary Final Rule) and the limit of one class / three credits will be lifted for students attending universities following a hybrid model.

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/sevp-modifies-temporary-ex...

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#132

Post by AnimalMuppet »

belval wrote: post #112
burkaman wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that misleading?

To be clear I have no skin in the game (not from the US), but if the GP's claims are true, then I was misled because I did think that the 40% that gets thrown around was founded only by immigrants. Does it change my view on immigration? Of course not, but it does indicate that if immigration was stopped entirely then it is not true to say that that 40% slice of fortune 500 companies would simply never have been found…

Well... 40% of the Fortune 500 had at least one founder that was from an immigrant family. I think that's the precise statement, but I might misunderstand.

That is not the same as saying that 40% of the founders of Fortune 500 companies were immigrants (which I believe is bruceb's point).

To your point: Let's say there were 5 founders. Let's say one was an immigrant. Would the company still have been founded by the other 4, if the immigrant were not there? That's unknown, but one would expect that at least some of the time the answer is "no". Or if it were founded, would it have grown as large as it did? Again, unknown, but in at least some cases the answer is probably "no".

To argue otherwise is to say that founders are replaceable parts - that they have nothing unique to add. That seems... questionable.

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#133

Post by magicsmoke »

three_seagrass wrote: post #57
curiousllama wrote: post #43

This is just another step in a broad-based program to make sure as few highly qualified people as possible can come to learn and work in the US. (1) F1 visas have been effectively banned in much of the world since COVID started - the required interviews could only be done in now-closed centers. (2) H1B, L1, H4, and J1 visas have been suspended until the end of the year, leaving OPT transfers, H1B lottery winners (alr…

It's another measurable, negative impact of the America First philosophy [1]. 40% of the Fortune 500 companies are founded by immigrant families [2][3], so the U.S. is really shooting itself in the foot (again). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_(policy) [2] F500 2010: http://research.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/20... (pdf) [3] F500 2017: https://startupsusa.org/fortune500/

A players hire A players, B players hire C players.

If ability is normally distributed, and immigration is a filter for A players, their descendants will regress to the mean to become B players. B players want their C player American kids to have jobs over the A player non-American immigrant. America first.

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#134

Post by JoeAltmaier »

esoterica wrote: post #106
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Students do all sorts of things to get a degree. Lots of folks in the working world, work at 3AM. Its not 'ridiculous', just onerous.

Making people do onerous things without good cause IS ridiculous.

Um, it is a good reason. To continue to get a quality education.

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#135

Post by whalesalad »

augustt wrote: post #73
whalesalad wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not immoral, it's business. Harvard has presented a product and you are free to take it or leave it. What is unfortuntate though is that we've been conditioned as a society to believe that a higher education is the most valuable thing you could ever earn.

So, still immoral. It's gatekeeping upwards mobility with absurd prices.

You're missing the entire point of my comment - college is antiquated.

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#136

Post by burkaman »

rileymat2 wrote: post #120
burkaman wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that misleading?

I don’t agree with the overall point but there is an implication in the use of the stat that the business would not have started if not for that 1 out of 5 founder. Alternatively, that role would have been filled By someone else.

I don't understand what you mean. How would the role be filled? They invented the role, that's the point of founding something. They didn't apply to a job posting for the position of "founder" that somebody else could have applied to.

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#137

Post by anon102010 »

tim58 wrote: post #121
screenbeam wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

America first is a great policy. Our people need jobs and our policies should reflect that.

Currently people with a Computer Science degree have ~95% employment during the worst economic downturn of my lifetime. I don't need goverment protection for my job. In order to be more competitive my company needs more workers with Computer Science degrees. Reducing the supply of computer science degree holders actually hurts my long term career prospects by reducing the international competitiveness of the type of…

No kidding, the US is gobbling up the worlds wealth through tech. The stupidity of throwing this away is monumental.

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#138

Post by JoeAltmaier »

whalesalad wrote: post #135
augustt wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, still immoral. It's gatekeeping upwards mobility with absurd prices.

You're missing the entire point of my comment - college is antiquated.

So says you. But the rest of the world, including the job market, thinks otherwise. Thus, gatekeeping etc and the moral impact.

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#139

Post by yizhang7210 »

I'm genuine curious what economic benefits this brings. With the very limited economics I've learned, most students are net spenders in the country, them being here will only pour more money in. Economically, how does stopping them coming in help anyone?

Re: Int. students may need to leave US if classes are 100% Remote

#140

Post by anon102010 »

twsttest wrote: post #69
curiousllama wrote: post #43

This is just another step in a broad-based program to make sure as few highly qualified people as possible can come to learn and work in the US. (1) F1 visas have been effectively banned in much of the world since COVID started - the required interviews could only be done in now-closed centers. (2) H1B, L1, H4, and J1 visas have been suspended until the end of the year, leaving OPT transfers, H1B lottery winners (alr…

The US allows over 1 million immigrants per year. Maybe less the past year, but still extremely high on an immigrant per capita basis. H1B was being abused and needed to be reigned in. There are still plenty of people coming into the country through various means, the US is still extremely generous with immigration. There are plenty of qualified citizens here and in the zero sum game that is hiring national immigrati…

And yet despite bi-partisan legislation to reform H1B we get this stupidity.

It's going to be good to vote this cycle.

Post reply on HN