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

181–190 of 221 posts

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#181

Post by bmelton »

chx wrote: post #47

> If this approach were upheld, future orders might apply to any nation, and suddenly and unexpectedly bar its nationals from entering or returning to the United States. Aye, this is the crux of the matter, isn't it? I have a plane ticket from Canada to Europe in August, transiting in the USA and I have already contemplated changing my routing because who knows whether I will be admitted? Yes, the chances are heavily…

> I am slightly surprised to not see Boeing here, they are set to lose an enormous amount of money in Iran

I suspect that a likely reason is that Boeing is headquartered in Chicago, which doesn't fall under the purview of the Ninth Circuit. They may or may not be party to a similar filing for the Seventh Circuit.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#182

Post by nsxwolf »

hueving wrote: post #56
leereeves wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump issued an executive order (EO) temporarily suspending entry to the US for nationals of 7 countries listed by the DHS as "Countries of Concern", and temporarily suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. The State of Washington sued to block the EO. The lower court judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking the EO and Trump appealed. Now these 97 tech companies are sharing their opinion with the ap…

>Now these 97 tech companies are sharing their opinion To clarify, this is the leadership of those 97 companies. There is no indication whether or not that this is how the majority of their employees feel. This is the same virtue signaling that resulted in Trump being elected in the first place. An employee of one of these companies wouldn't dare now to express their agreement with Trump's policy because it's against…

If you were a pro-travel ban tech employee, in this climate, would you even want that to be known? That would likely be a career limiting move.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#183

Post by threeseed »

mschuster91 wrote: post #8
throwaway287391 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes sense as Elon is a Trump advisor. Also interestingly missing: Amazon.

I believe Elon Musk is playing (once again) the ultra-long game. He is betting that the court system as well as Congress will limit Donald Trump and his cronies from doing something that is grounds for impeachment - and so Donald Trump will be in office for the entire term. Given this, it makes sense to be in a position that has at least a tiny bit of influence on Trump. Amazon has a similar position: they need large…

> Elon Musk is playing (once again) the ultra-long game

He's also playing the short game. Sucking up to Trump is a smart business move when you're in industries that could be adversely affected by a relaxing of energy regulations or a reduction in funding for space programs.

Just a shame Musk doesn't own up to it.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#184

Post by threeseed »

coldtea wrote: post #100
mschuster91 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly hope that Trump won't serve his full term, but I believe he will. The problem is that it would take a really epic scandal to get Trump formally impeached - you need a 2/3 majority, and even the stuff Trump has done already was not enough to organize an impeachment. The other obvious solution might be that someone kills or maims Trump, but no one wants that. No matter how evil Trump is, murder is NOT a sol…

> No matter how evil Trump is Evil is a theological assessment. Do people really believe Trump (or other politicians) are some kind of evil incarnate, constantly thinking about how to do harm? It's just people with different values and different approaches on the world. Of course not all approaches are equally valid, and some can be said to be evil or harmful etc, but nothing Trump ever did can warrant the person is…

Trump is not evil. But he is morally bankrupt.

When you brag about sexually assaulting women whilst your wife is pregnant or the callous, baseless attacks on minorities and the weak you really are the lowest of the low.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#185

Post by ThrustVectoring »

jklein11 wrote: post #134
ThrustVectoring wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another way is to estimate the net present value of America's GDP by multiplying it by 20 or so, which implies that it's roughly 1% of American wealth. Alternatively, percentage of rents at office and industrial zoned land would be a good measure. That'd separate out national vs international activity, at the cost of being significantly more difficult to estimate and calculate. I actually don't know how well rents an…

Out of curiosity, why ~20?

Historically, $20 is the price of something that gives you $1/year. This, like, goes back to the medieval era.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#186

Post by alex- »

flexie wrote: post #64

Some notable American tech companies that didn't sign: - Tesla - SpaceX - Amazon - HP - IBM - Dell - Oracle - VMware - Palantir - Priceline - Expedia - Yahoo - Groupon - TripAdvisor - Symantec - Fiserv - Intuit There could be many reasons. Maybe they weren't invited to participate, maybe they choose to stay out of a political discussion, maybe they thought it could hurt their business interests, and maybe they didn't…

Looks like Cisco did not sign either. 9 of the largest 15 IT companies in the world are US owned[1]

Looks like 5 of them did not sign up (HP, Amazon, IBM, Dell and Cisco) and 4 did (Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet and Intel)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_informatio...

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#187

Post by doolsing »

flexie wrote: post #64

Some notable American tech companies that didn't sign: - Tesla - SpaceX - Amazon - HP - IBM - Dell - Oracle - VMware - Palantir - Priceline - Expedia - Yahoo - Groupon - TripAdvisor - Symantec - Fiserv - Intuit There could be many reasons. Maybe they weren't invited to participate, maybe they choose to stay out of a political discussion, maybe they thought it could hurt their business interests, and maybe they didn't…

IBM has been sucking up to the Trump administration, presumably eyeing govt contracts. http://fortune.com/2016/12/20/trump-ibm-ginni-rometty/

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#188

Post by doolsing »

hajile wrote: post #156
simonh wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a US citizen so I'm just commenting as an observer. I'm a lot less worried about legislation overall because it does get scrutinized by the wider elected legislature. At the end of the day if the US as a nation decides to restrict immigration more then that's your prerogative as a nation. The American people voted in Trump and the current largely Republican legislature fair and square and they do have a right…

US immigration law gives the president explicit right to do exactly what he did (and that has been upheld by the supreme court in the past). See section f https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

US law prohibits discriminating based on national origin except under specific circumstances. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1152

(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 1101(a)(27), 1151(b)(2)(A)(i), and 1153 of this title, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.

Re: Amicus brief on behalf of 97 tech companies

#190

Post by dragonwriter »

alex- wrote: post #186
flexie wrote: post #64

Some notable American tech companies that didn't sign: - Tesla - SpaceX - Amazon - HP - IBM - Dell - Oracle - VMware - Palantir - Priceline - Expedia - Yahoo - Groupon - TripAdvisor - Symantec - Fiserv - Intuit There could be many reasons. Maybe they weren't invited to participate, maybe they choose to stay out of a political discussion, maybe they thought it could hurt their business interests, and maybe they didn't…

Looks like Cisco did not sign either. 9 of the largest 15 IT companies in the world are US owned[1] Looks like 5 of them did not sign up (HP, Amazon, IBM, Dell and Cisco) and 4 did (Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet and Intel) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_informatio...

Amazon, as one of the plaintiffs in the case (the State of Washington is the first named plaintiff; the "et al." on the case title means there are others, which include Amazon and Expedia), can't file (alone or with others) an amicus brief, which is a brief by interested non-parties.

But it's misleading to count them as a company that choose not to sign on to the amicus brief.

Post reply on HN