If you believe that technology is reducing friction in the world (disintermediation, peer-to-peer communication, censorless worldworld communication,) then this is a good thing.
Why? Most big companies are multinational: if you want to hire person X, you hire person X. She may have to work in the London office, rather than the New York office, but they still get hired. Every arbitrary barrier (e.g. work restriction) imposed by a random government just raises the cost of doing business and making products... lawyers, video conferences, transatlantic phone calls, and flights to Tokyo are just money spent to reduce friction. That money could be better spent on salaries and research if the government was not interfering.
Secondly, if you're paying an employee in say Singapore, he is taxed by Singapore and spends the bulk of his income in Singapore. Why not just let him live here, contribute to the US tax base, and spend his money in US stores?
Using H1Bs policy to control multinational hiring practices will be as successful as using US copyright law to control peer-to-peer multinational file sharing networks. It is a blunt instrument that encourages the users (in this case corporations) to route around the damage. One day you wake up and find you've hurt your own tax base without any significant economic benefit to yourself.
The shortage is not a myth. I could hire 20 people tomorrow if they could demonstrate knowledge and skill at computer programming (e.g. explain sorting algorithms, garbage collection strategies, or graph traversal.) They would all be offered good salaries, and their compensation would later depend totally on their contributions.
Graylisting? Half our recent hires have had gray hair! The last person I seriously wanted to recruit was over 50 (it was a sys admin type job, and the candidate was largely self taught and trained.)
Computer prgrammers are a lot like lawyers. Fresh out of school, raw talent and education matter a lot. As they age, you start to see their true worth... do they have a solid philosophical grounding in the field, are they staying up to date with the latest developments? Or are they retreating into narrow fields of expertise where specialized knowledge is the value-added skill? The first you want, the second you should avoid.
The velocity limit is Mach 2. I looked into getting an unlimited GPS (I needed Mach 3, 90K feet, with some serious size contraints.) It is doable: you need a government waiver, and that seems to require a secure storage location, a good reason, etc.
"One character at a time" was an old bug on at least one system (TOPS-20.) The password validation system did a strcmp to check for a password match. You could also get a page fault count on a process. So, you put your trial password across a page boundary with the first character on one page, the rest on the next page. Try each first character in turn until you see a page fault to the rest of the password, shift to two characters on the first page, and repeat until you have the entire password. An elegant attack that reduced the effort from 26^36 to 26*36!
No, your tug propagates up the pole at no more than the speed of light. The interactions between the atoms in the pole do not magically exceed the speed of light.
This seems to be an effective attack on freedom of assembly. The balance of companies versus unions has a body of law associated with it. Here we have individuals rapidly assembling and deciding on a plan of action amongst themselves (an action legal for any one of those individuals.) The court seems to have declared them a de facto union, and therefore in violation of laws applying to unions. This lets the company treat these people as a union, and search for evidence of violation of laws concerning union/company relationships.
Under this reasoning, any on-line group of people could be considered a legal entity. E.g. members of Slashdot discussing DeCSS could all be considered felony conspirators attempting to undermine the DMCA.
(a) Violations regarding circumvention of technological measures.--(1)(A)No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access...
Hmmm... what does the word "effectively" mean here in legalese? If the measure is ineffective, because it can be trivially circumvented, does the law become non-applicable?
Slashdot Mirror
Why? Most big companies are multinational: if you want to hire person X, you hire person X. She may have to work in the London office, rather than the New York office, but they still get hired. Every arbitrary barrier (e.g. work restriction) imposed by a random government just raises the cost of doing business and making products... lawyers, video conferences, transatlantic phone calls, and flights to Tokyo are just money spent to reduce friction. That money could be better spent on salaries and research if the government was not interfering.
Secondly, if you're paying an employee in say Singapore, he is taxed by Singapore and spends the bulk of his income in Singapore. Why not just let him live here, contribute to the US tax base, and spend his money in US stores?
Using H1Bs policy to control multinational hiring practices will be as successful as using US copyright law to control peer-to-peer multinational file sharing networks. It is a blunt instrument that encourages the users (in this case corporations) to route around the damage. One day you wake up and find you've hurt your own tax base without any significant economic benefit to yourself.
Graylisting? Half our recent hires have had gray hair! The last person I seriously wanted to recruit was over 50 (it was a sys admin type job, and the candidate was largely self taught and trained.)
Computer prgrammers are a lot like lawyers. Fresh out of school, raw talent and education matter a lot. As they age, you start to see their true worth... do they have a solid philosophical grounding in the field, are they staying up to date with the latest developments? Or are they retreating into narrow fields of expertise where specialized knowledge is the value-added skill? The first you want, the second you should avoid.
The velocity limit is Mach 2. I looked into getting an unlimited GPS (I needed Mach 3, 90K feet, with some serious size contraints.) It is doable: you need a government waiver, and that seems to require a secure storage location, a good reason, etc.
"One character at a time" was an old bug on at least one system (TOPS-20.) The password validation system did a strcmp to check for a password match. You could also get a page fault count on a process. So, you put your trial password across a page boundary with the first character on one page, the rest on the next page. Try each first character in turn until you see a page fault to the rest of the password, shift to two characters on the first page, and repeat until you have the entire password. An elegant attack that reduced the effort from 26^36 to 26*36!
No, your tug propagates up the pole at no more than the speed of light. The interactions between the atoms in the pole do not magically exceed the speed of light.
Film is 24fps because that is about the minimum fps that the eye will tolerate. The eye prefers at least 120fps, and perhaps more.
This seems to be an effective attack on freedom of assembly. The balance of companies versus unions has a body of law associated with it. Here we have individuals rapidly assembling and deciding on a plan of action amongst themselves (an action legal for any one of those individuals.) The court seems to have declared them a de facto union, and therefore in violation of laws applying to unions. This lets the company treat these people as a union, and search for evidence of violation of laws concerning union/company relationships.
Under this reasoning, any on-line group of people could be considered a legal entity. E.g. members of Slashdot discussing DeCSS could all be considered felony conspirators attempting to undermine the DMCA.
I am afraid.
Hmmm... what does the word "effectively" mean here in legalese? If the measure is ineffective, because it can be trivially circumvented, does the law become non-applicable?