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

The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

bits.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–129 of 129 posts

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#121

Post by chiffonade »

ido wrote: post #112
chiffonade wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How easy it is to live there without knowing Spanish Impossible, because if you move somewhere foreign, you're going to learn the language unconsciously within 6 months. People who have only lived in the US don't know this. It almost takes no effort. The human brain is good at this sort of thing.

As someone who has been living in Vienna for the past 4 years (and whose German is his 3rd language), I can tell you that that was certainly not my experience- I could speak basic German at 6 months but it took much longer than that to become fluent. On the other hand, I've heard from friends who spent some time in South America that Spanish is an exceptionally easy language to learn, and that they could speak half-w…

> I can tell you that that was certainly not my experience- I could speak basic German at 6 months

So in other words, you learned German within 6 months.

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#122

Post by anamax »

sho wrote: post #119
anamax wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyone knows someone with a story about some horrible entry into the US. Everyone knows someone who has a friend who knew the guy who tried to dry his poodle in the microwave. I'm not saying that Immigration and/or Homeland Security is great, but the rumor-mongering is unjustified. > the problem is that it can happen at all and they're not screw-ups, it's policy. And you know this because.... > I am an Australian…

"Everyone knows someone who has a friend who knew the guy who tried to dry his poodle in the microwave." I'm not sure what you mean. I'm not talking about some urban legend that gets passed through 10 generations of "friends of friends", I'm saying that many people have had bad experiences with US Immigration, and word gets around. I personally know someone who now enters the US by land via Canada because of his repe…

>> "And you know this because...."

> Because .. it's self evident and obviously true? What are you trying to say - that the hostile suspicion of foreigners at the US Border is not policy?

As I suspected, you're guessing - it's sort of like fundamental attribution error.

> Huh? We're talking about the US Border, specifically about foreigners trying to visit, many who have never been there before.

How does immigration/homeland security know that someone has never been to the US before? (Hint: their passport isn't reliable information.)

And, if the US isn't trading fingerprint info with everyone it can, it isn't doing its job.

BTW - The US does collect fingerprints overseas in certain countries. However, thanks to discrimination laws, it can't just check fingerprints of folks who look like they might be from those places.

If you argued that we're practicing "security theater", not security, you wouldn't get an argument from me.

> Anyway, I hope that with the new administration in charge and the memory of 9/11 receding, this horrible system will be turned off.

Be ready to be disappointed.

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#123

Post by ido »

chiffonade wrote: post #121
ido wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who has been living in Vienna for the past 4 years (and whose German is his 3rd language), I can tell you that that was certainly not my experience- I could speak basic German at 6 months but it took much longer than that to become fluent. On the other hand, I've heard from friends who spent some time in South America that Spanish is an exceptionally easy language to learn, and that they could speak half-w…

> I can tell you that that was certainly not my experience- I could speak basic German at 6 months So in other words, you learned German within 6 months.

Actually I learned it for 2 semesters before coming to Vienna.

After 6 months in Vienna I could speak basic German but definitely not work & live without using English most of the time.

There is a big difference between being able to exchange pleasantries & understanding the menu at a restaurant and being able to conduct an intelligent conversation or explain complex ideas in it.

Maybe if you're a construction worker your requirements are different, but you cannot work as a (good) software developer without sharing a high level of understanding of at least one language with your coworkers.

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#124

Post by ido »

Hexstream wrote: post #117
ido wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who has been living in Vienna for the past 4 years (and whose German is his 3rd language), I can tell you that that was certainly not my experience- I could speak basic German at 6 months but it took much longer than that to become fluent. On the other hand, I've heard from friends who spent some time in South America that Spanish is an exceptionally easy language to learn, and that they could speak half-w…

Well, I think English and Spanish both are Latin derivatives while German and Japanese aren't. So that would explain everything.

English is West Germanic (like German) but have had most of its vocabulary replaced by a Latin-derived one (see: the Norman invasion of Britain).

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#125

Post by anamax »

sho wrote: post #119
anamax wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyone knows someone with a story about some horrible entry into the US. Everyone knows someone who has a friend who knew the guy who tried to dry his poodle in the microwave. I'm not saying that Immigration and/or Homeland Security is great, but the rumor-mongering is unjustified. > the problem is that it can happen at all and they're not screw-ups, it's policy. And you know this because.... > I am an Australian…

"Everyone knows someone who has a friend who knew the guy who tried to dry his poodle in the microwave." I'm not sure what you mean. I'm not talking about some urban legend that gets passed through 10 generations of "friends of friends", I'm saying that many people have had bad experiences with US Immigration, and word gets around. I personally know someone who now enters the US by land via Canada because of his repe…

> No need to turn this into a "my country is better than yours" pissing match

My apologies - that wasn't my intent.

I was trying to argue that border stuff is broken pretty much everywhere.

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#126

Post by sho »

anamax wrote: post #125
sho wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Everyone knows someone who has a friend who knew the guy who tried to dry his poodle in the microwave." I'm not sure what you mean. I'm not talking about some urban legend that gets passed through 10 generations of "friends of friends", I'm saying that many people have had bad experiences with US Immigration, and word gets around. I personally know someone who now enters the US by land via Canada because of his repe…

> No need to turn this into a "my country is better than yours" pissing match My apologies - that wasn't my intent. I was trying to argue that border stuff is broken pretty much everywhere.

I agree, but there's different levels of "broken". The photography and fingerprinting is an egregious breach of privacy and dignity and surely puts the US (and Japan, btw) at the front of the pack in terms of just how broken the system is.

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#127

Post by sho »

anamax wrote: post #122
sho wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Everyone knows someone who has a friend who knew the guy who tried to dry his poodle in the microwave." I'm not sure what you mean. I'm not talking about some urban legend that gets passed through 10 generations of "friends of friends", I'm saying that many people have had bad experiences with US Immigration, and word gets around. I personally know someone who now enters the US by land via Canada because of his repe…

>> "And you know this because...." > Because .. it's self evident and obviously true? What are you trying to say - that the hostile suspicion of foreigners at the US Border is not policy? As I suspected, you're guessing - it's sort of like fundamental attribution error. > Huh? We're talking about the US Border, specifically about foreigners trying to visit, many who have never been there before. How does immigration/…

"As I suspected, you're guessing - it's sort of like fundamental attribution error."

I don't think so. It's merely the most likely explanation. I note you haven't advanced any competing theories. However, not like I have any hard evidence, so consider the point retracted if it bothers you.

(various points about fingerprint collection)

Well, everything you say is true, as far as it goes. My point is not that fingerprint collection is utterly useless and no case whatsoever can be made for its enactment. What I am trying to say is that it is an extreme tactic with high costs, not least of which that it turns people off visiting the US at all, and its benefits are nebulous and require a lot of unlikely "what-if" scenarios to pay off at all. Meanwhile, the data collected is, IMO, very dangerous.

Ah, I see you've heard of the term "security theatre". Yes, that's exactly what it is, and a very damaging and costly act it is too.

"Be ready to be disappointed."

I am, but I don't think it's impossible that the draconian entry procedures will be dropped. They're really a product of paranoia and irrational fear; this dissipates in time.

When the drumbeat of terrorism scaremongering has died down a bit, and the post-crisis economic reality has dawned on everyone, it might well occur to the leaders of the country that perhaps they can't afford to throw away tourist and business dollars on misguided security theatre any more. It might take a while, but economic pragmatism wins out every time.

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#128

Post by sho »

anamax wrote: post #116
tjmc wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know how things are in Australia, but we can't identify criminals and the like without actually checking. Interesting viewpoint. Would you have a problem with having your photograph and fingerprints taken whenever you boarded a domestic flight? I'm sure they'd catch plenty of criminals that way too.

> Interesting viewpoint. Would you have a problem with having your photograph and fingerprints taken whenever you boarded a domestic flight? I'm sure they'd catch plenty of criminals that way too. It's interesting that you think that domestic travel and crossing a national border are the same. I know that Australia is concerned about young women visiting. Does it also care about criminals? Does it have any checks? An…

"It's interesting that you think that domestic travel and crossing a national border are the same."

You're deliberately missing his point.

His point is that if your objective is to catch criminals, and in pursuit of that goal you're willing to set up checkpoints to collect fingerprints, and you're the US authorities primarily concerned with US criminals - wouldn't it be far better to set up those checkpoints inside the country?

It would be, and so obviously these fingerprint checks are not to catch criminals.

And before you say it, no, I can't prove that, I am merely using deduction to make an argument for use in debate, which I believe is the point of this site.

"I know that Australia is concerned about young women visiting. "

Oh yes, from your personal anecdote about one (1) person. Australia is not perfect but you would be hard pressed to find much evidence, even anecdotal, that on balance it even comes close to the oppresive US border experience.

And personally I am firmly in favour of as many young women visiting as possible : )

"Does it also care about criminals? Does it have any checks?"

Yes, of course, and yes, it has checks. I am assuming you're a US Citizen - you'd need an ETAS visa; you apply in advance, pay some nominal fee, and the check is performed before you even get on the plane. Your visa is then automatically keyed to your personal information and passport number.

Australian citizens need a similar visa from the US, which is called USVISIT. The fingerprints are then taken upon arrival regardless, making everyone wonder what the damn point of the visa was in the first place.

And Australian passports are electronically encoded with biometric information, btw, and are very hard to fake. It would be much easier to simply fake the fingerprints, as Japan has discovered (one South Korean was recently arrested after entering Japan using fake fingerprints five times).

"And, if it does, I'm sure that you're fighting any that aren't applied to domestic travel, right?"

A spurious strawman argument which I won't respond to.

Re: The Real High-Tech Immigrant Problem: They’re Leaving

#129

Post by anamax »

sho wrote: post #128
anamax wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting viewpoint. Would you have a problem with having your photograph and fingerprints taken whenever you boarded a domestic flight? I'm sure they'd catch plenty of criminals that way too. It's interesting that you think that domestic travel and crossing a national border are the same. I know that Australia is concerned about young women visiting. Does it also care about criminals? Does it have any checks? An…

"It's interesting that you think that domestic travel and crossing a national border are the same." You're deliberately missing his point. His point is that if your objective is to catch criminals, and in pursuit of that goal you're willing to set up checkpoints to collect fingerprints, and you're the US authorities primarily concerned with US criminals - wouldn't it be far better to set up those checkpoints inside t…

> His point is that if your objective is to catch criminals, and in pursuit of that goal you're willing to set up checkpoints to collect fingerprints, and you're the US authorities primarily concerned with US criminals - wouldn't it be far better to set up those checkpoints inside the country?

The US has no laws against criminals travelling (assuming that they're not being pursued). It has laws against people with certain characteristics entering the country.

In short, the "catch criminals" premise was wrong.

Post reply on HN