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

Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 655 posts

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#381

Post by mahyarm »

pgeorgi wrote: post #239
OmarIsmail wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any reputable tech company (or startup) will provide health insurance and or sufficient wage so that you and your partner will be able to afford more than adequate insurance. It's not the upper-middle class programmers that get screwed by the US' ridiculously evil and horrible health care system. It's the 99% that make less than 100K/year.

> Any reputable tech company (or startup) will provide health insurance ... which generates another dependency on the employer (beyond the work visa thing). I know the history of the employer-pays-for-health-care model in the US, but really: it's broken, fix it.

You already have that dependency in terms of your visa. If you don't work for your employer anymore, you don't have a visa any more, and you need to leave the country fairly quickly or get a new visa elsewhere. In the light of that the healthcare part doesn't matter as much.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#382

Post by anemitz »

tolmasky wrote: post #320
austenallred wrote: post #12

I really want to believe this, but I'm not sure that I do. Of course the tech companies want to hire people from overseas; being able to hire someone from India for half the cost but have them live in the US so there's some level of accountability/trust is a no-brainer. Huge new, cheap talent pool. But, if I'm an entry-level, US-based programmer, what I see are floods of cheap talent, some with questionable skills, c…

> ut, if I'm an entry-level, US-based programmer, what I see are floods of cheap talent, some with questionable skills, coming over to compete for my job. I don't understand this dichotomy. Why would companies here go out of their way to hire cheap labor of questionable skill outside the U.S.?? Bad cheap labor is easy to find. Call up a recruiter and say "I need 20 horrible programmers", they're not going to say "oh…

During my career I've witnessed a stark contrast between different visa holders:

1) Exceptional — the best and brightest from all walks of life. IIT Delhi to NUS Singapore. Hands down amazing folks who consistently outperformed their peers.

2) Cheap(er), mediocre — predominantly H1B holders from India and China. Varying degrees of output and communication skills. Mostly “slow tracked” for promotion and given the lowest salary in a given position’s range.

My perception is that the startup community has generally ignored group #2’s existence. It’s not very surprising when you consider who the top 5 h1b sponsors last year: Infosys, Tata, Wipro, Deloitte, and Accenture[1]. Most startup folk would likely be surprised since we usually associate tech companies -> Google instead of Wipro.

Logically your thinking is spot-on, but I'm not so sure the truth is so black and white. Consider the psychology of an h1b holder from India who has a 7 year wait to get a green card -- how is that person thinking about aggressive career moves? The answer is that they probably aren't.

I bet if you looked at relative rates of employee churn you'd find visa holders stay with employers longer than their counterparts. They are probably also less likely to push for raises / promotions since their negotiating position is somewhat compromised by them needing another employer to transfer this visa to (possible, but very stressful). There is also likely a sense of indebtedness to a company when someone is first sponsored. This is probably the biggest difference when considering the cost of Group #2 vs similarly qualified domestic labor.

Now consider those top 5 h1b sponsors again -- how does their workforce stack up? My intuition says they aren't the best and brightest from group #1 (don't know how to prove or disprove this just my qualitative observation).

What seems to be happening is that we have huge consulting firms sponsoring labor from Group #2 -- and these companies are run by smart folks. They've developing a well-oiled machine for employing a more loyal workforce, at less cost -- and while the quality isn't as high as it could be, it's good enough to make their business model work. This is the exact opposite model of startups (and large, but highly innovative companies like Google) who want to only hire from Group #1.

As a founder I've experienced the Group #1 labor shortage first-hand but I also worked with Group #2 in the industry and both experiences left me leaving a lot to be desired with our current immigration policy. I see both sides of this debate, but from my standpoint everyone is right. The disconnect seems to be that "anti-immigration" camp is fighting against expansion of Group #2 while startups and innovative companies like Google, et al. are fighting to increase visas for Group #1.

What can we do to bridge that communication disconnect?

[1] — http://h1b-visas.findthecompany.com

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#383

Post by gpcz »

dang wrote: post #327

All: much of this thread is of low quality, below the standard that Hacker News discussion should adhere to, because it doesn't engage with what pg's essay actually says. It merely uses it as a trigger point for passions about other things, like H1Bs and Infosys. In other words it goes on a generic tangent, and generic tangents are the vectors we most need to avoid if we want discussions that are substantive instead…

If the comment quality has eroded, is that because the standards are too lax (in which adding a new rule will theoretically fix it), or is it because of an Eternal September-type issue? If it's an Eternal September issue, then you have an enforcement problem: the upvote/downvote system is democratic, so the community would be unable to police itself against the new rule. The obvious solution would be to have people "more equal" than others, but then there's a possibility of groupthink forming and/or resentment against perceived "censorship." These are classic problems of Internet forum governance.

With all due respect to pg, one data point against the idea that it's just the standards being too lax is that this article was posted on Hacker News in the first place. The Hacker News guidelines state that most stories about politics are off-topic unless they are evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. I've never read tech news sites where the H1-B debate wasn't going on (I've been reading since 2001 or so), and based on the mountains of H1-B rhetoric I've read online, the arguments raised in the article are not new.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#384

Post by cryofan »

I call on the local sheriff to investigate any promoters of mass immigration for treason.

This is war. These immigrants are invaders, being brought in by the mega-corporations against the will of the people.

This is an invasion, and the elite are on the side of the invaders.

That is treason.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#385

Post by ColinCera »

23david wrote: post #204
austenallred wrote: post #12

I really want to believe this, but I'm not sure that I do. Of course the tech companies want to hire people from overseas; being able to hire someone from India for half the cost but have them live in the US so there's some level of accountability/trust is a no-brainer. Huge new, cheap talent pool. But, if I'm an entry-level, US-based programmer, what I see are floods of cheap talent, some with questionable skills, c…

I think it's important for all startup founders to realize that non-executive salaries in the U.S. tech industry have been incredibly distorted by the illegal wage fixing practiced over the last 10-15 years. The wage fixing set an artificial ceiling on programmer salaries. And if it's now stopped, we should expect a major correction over the next 5 years as market wages adjust. I'm hopeful that recent salary increase…

What "wage-fixing" are you talking about? Are you referring to the brief period in which a handful of tech companies colluded to tamp down salaries and cross-recruiting? Because that involved only a tiny percentage of the software developers in the US and had no significant impact on the national average salaries. Or has there been broader wage-fixing that you're aware of?

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#386

Post by danmaz74 »

thmcmahon wrote: post #375
danmaz74 wrote: post #108

It looks to me like the solution to the problem is simple. Just have a "high tech visa" with no number limit, but one simple requirement: The company requesting the job needs to be offering something like 150% (or 200% or whatever makes sense) the average salary of the US workforce, or in their state. This will ensure that the visa will only be offered for skills that are difficult to find in the USA (or the specific…

This is essentially how the 457 visa works in Australia. It's uncapped but you have to pay a 'market salary rate', which is either the salary of an equivalent worker in the firm, or of an equivalent worker In the industry.

Interesting... but how do they determine the salary of an "equivalent worker"?

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#387

Post by 1971genocide »

gaius wrote: post #365
1971genocide wrote: post #259

A lot of people in this thread seem to be really short sighted. Yes every tech worker's salary will drop significantly if the United States allowed more open immigration laws. But think about this - what would have happened if elon musk, vinod khosla,Sundar Pichai though the united state was not worth the trouble ? Silicon Valley would prolly exist but wouldn't have the monopoly on software that it has. I am not an a…

every tech worker's salary will drop significantly if the United States allowed more open immigration laws. But think about this - what would have happened if elon musk, vinod khosla,Sundar Pichai See, this is just crazy. Why would you or I or anyone want to make ourselves materially worse off, so some guys we've never met, and who couldn't care less about us, can become richer than the dreams of avarice? Politicians…

The thing you are suggesting leads to a frighting conclusion. Are you saying that you are against people like elon musk from doing what he does ? He wasn't born into wealth and was middle class just like you and me but was just too damn smart. The free market rewarded him for his smartness and we are all better off because of it.

Yes he became really rich but the net sum of wealth he provided in return has made everyone else much richer than him.

You are making the wrong conclusion that you are worse off "materially" if such smart individuals didn't innovate. In fact you and everyone else in america would be slightly poorer.

Most countries do not even have a "good economy" that they can brag about. The fact that you want a larger portion of the massive wealth these people have brought to america is an really entitled opinion to have.

America is an an midst of an economic boom which is almost a miracle obama has pulled ( compared to its EU/Asian/SouthAmerican Counterparts ) . If you are unhappy that america is also home to some of the richest and smartest individuals on the planet and you are trying to compare yourself to their standard and saying "Uhh, I want some of that" then its a problem of mentality and not about wealth/immigration/politics/etc.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#388

Post by waterlesscloud »

dang wrote: post #327

All: much of this thread is of low quality, below the standard that Hacker News discussion should adhere to, because it doesn't engage with what pg's essay actually says. It merely uses it as a trigger point for passions about other things, like H1Bs and Infosys. In other words it goes on a generic tangent, and generic tangents are the vectors we most need to avoid if we want discussions that are substantive instead…

Perhaps the essay just doesn't say what it wants to say very effectively.

It starts right out painting people who disagree with its thesis as "anti-immigration".

So no one should be surprised about the quality of conversation that results from that.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#389

Post by LetBinding »

gaadd33 wrote: post #363
LetBinding wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

O-1 is also tied to the sponsoring company. The standards set by the government for the O-1 visa are more geared towards pure research scientist or professor kind of positions. A PhD is a minimum requirement along with publications in top international journals. Most of the top engineers and developers don't have a PhD or scientific publications. O-1 is more appropriate for an university professor or NASA scientist p…

From reading this: http://www.uscis.gov/eir/visa-guide/o-1a-extraordinary-abili... It seems like you need 3 of the 8: 1,2, and 3 seem hard to do 4 might not be too hard 5 requires a letter from the company ceo/evidence that you are actually doing something exceptional/useful 6 would be hard 7 is a letter requirement saying that your position is critical, I assume if you are an exceptional programmer it should be easy…

7 is not satisfied by a letter from any company CEO. The person writing the letter has to be a distinguished individual in their own capacity. A startup CEO, irrespective of potential, is a nobody. Tim Cook writing the letter means something. Also 1 letter doesn't suffice. O-1 applications typically require 7-8 such letters from distinguished individuals ~not directly related to your field~. At a minimum 3 or 4 are needed.

Remember, US immigration is not an objective process, i.e., you satisfy 3 of 8 points, you are in. It is a subjective process. The sponsoring company hires a lawyer to petition USCIS making a case for the visa. The subjective interpretation of the petition is completely at the discretion of the specific case officer. The recent multi-year trend of evaluating O-1 visa petitions seems to be completely dependent on number of publications in journals, impact factor of those journals, number of citations in google scholar, your work being published in major news media, and several letters of support from distinguished individuals from ~outside~ your primary area of expertise (your contributions are considered valuable if people not in your immediate field have a high opinion of you).

The law offices of Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy LLP, the immigration attorneys that 95% of Bay Area companies retain for filing immigration visas, will not even accept your case if the candidate doesn't have a Ph.D. with several years of high impact publications.

As you can see, this visa is geared towards positions as university faculty, major national lab scientists, or industry research labs of big firms. This visa doesn't help startups. I know of only one startup that successfully got the O-1 visa for a Chinese data scientist. But that person was part of the CERN team that won the Nobel prize.

There is a huge gap between the targeted beneficiaries of the O-1 and H-1B visa. One is geared towards Nobel prize caliber scientists, the other towards run of the mill developers working in body shops and overseas consulting firms.

The prototypical 10X developers that most startups seek do not usually meet the criteria for the O-1, and is at a disadvantage in the H-1B lottery. A lottery treats every application equally. It makes no distinction between an extremely competent individual and an extremely incompetent one. This favors body shoppers and outsourcers since they can mass-file visa petitions for every warm body on their payroll overseas hoping some of them make the lottery. A startup filing one or two visa petitions for a very specific individual is at a severe disadvantage.

Re: Let the Other 95% of Great Programmers In

#390

Post by aswanson »

mrottenkolber wrote: post #233
fsloth wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are basically saying that programming is not engineering but a (highly technical) craft and the best way to foster talent in it is to utilize the age old master/apprentice relationship? If so I agree. Universities do give the necessary theoretical muscles for a lots of things but they surely do not prepare for the craftmanship aspects (beyond informal cultural indoctrination, if any). I wonder if there could be a…

I never really did academia so I wouldn't know. To be honest, I think the age of academia is over. I have more against these institutions than I see value in them. I say get rid of them, we can do better. Why can't we teach "theoretical muscle" outside of universities? Wait, was the purpose of universities to maintain the state's control of education? Have they been putting thoughts in chains? Kept science away from…

Academia moves too slow in adapting to innovation, at least in terms of practice oriented fields like engineering. It's well suited to teach and progress theory but horrible in terms of preparing practitioners.
Post reply on HN