First, in response to a piece suggesting a framework for QA in open source software, you say:
"This is the kind of bullshit thinking that drives companies out of America and to the waiting hands of Countries that welcome them for being just a company,"
and then you say: "QA is very crucial for what I do, so I believe I am right in my thoughts."
It seems to me your thoughts could do with a bit of clarification.
This is the kind of bullshit thinking that drives companies out of America and to the waiting hands of Countries that welcome them for being just a company.
No, this is the kind of thinking that turns American corporations in global behemoths capable of crushing all competition. If open source wants to compete, ultimately it'll need to use some of the same techniques. Don't just dismiss QA because nothing you've ever done was important enough to need it...
If it weren't for the negative connotations, I'd say "a gook of geeks".
I mean, what could be better than weekend-all-night popcorn, DVD 'n' Quake sessions?
I live with my geek girlfriend, and her PC is in the living room with a DVD-ROM hooked up to the TV. She also has a better graphics card than mine (to support a Hauppage WinTV card), so I use her machine to play things like Quake, when she lets me. We regularly stay up till 4am surfing and programming. So I guess I have a geek house where nGeeks == 2.
I think we need ways of quantifying or rating geek houses: number of geeks, total feet of cat5, total wattage of data-carrying em radiation, total GB, MHz, etc.
Thanks for the rational discussion, which just proves my point. If you reread my message, I think you'll see that I wasn't saying that arguing against H1-B's is about xenophobia. I was talking about messages which don't discuss the topic at all, but rather focus on things like "what those aliens can do with their sorry asses" (hypothetical paraphrase.)
As to the actual H1-B issue, I agree the program is highly flawed, as is immigration as a whole in the U.S. My personal bias is that they should consider offering green cards to more people on the basis of merit, rather than purely on things like employment sponsorship. Right now, there are a few categories like "Alien of exceptional merit and ability" which are open to quite small numbers of people, who have had major achievements like winning awards and such. If they opened this up a little, to grant expedited green cards (provisional or otherwise) to people with demonstrable skills, the H1-B program could be virtually disbanded.
However, this idea seems to be at odds with the vision of the U.S. as a refuge for the downtrodden and oppressed; and it's at odds with those who just don't want to let more people in, so it comes under attack from both sides of the political spectrum.
I wonder if that's not the real reason that corps aren't pushing for more permanent immigration: they know it won't fly, since it implies discrimination against relatively unskilled immigrants on an unprecedented scale.
When it comes to the issue of wage competition from immigrants in general (as opposed to exploited H1-B's), I really think that's a red herring. I don't believe that the tech job market is a zero-sum game. The more highly skilled tech people there are in the U.S. (or any country), the more productive all its businesses will be, and the better off the country will be as a whole.
I find it strange how the/. crowd revels in amusement from clever remarks about the Hitchhiker's guide and the babelfish. Very wise and understanding about the tapestry of human culture and thought - all that makes us what we are, and how we live together. But when it comes to the real world, and people traveling and working in different countries and speaking with a different accent, there is so much veiled hostility and underlying scorn towards "them".
I've always assumed this was two different subpopulations on/. Any time immigration is raised as an issue, you get a lot of mostly AC's posting inarticulate and ignorant cliche-ridden messages effectively expressing the sentiment "me good; dang furriners bad."
In real life and on/., this sentiment invariably comes from people who are lacking in various assets or abilities, whether it be communication, education, intelligence, socialization, or whatever. It seems fairly obvious why they would feel threatened by people smarter and more ambitious than they are, coming to the U.S. to compete for jobs and other resources.
But I've always retained the fond hope that the/.ers who read HHGTTG, Neal Stephenson, etc., aren't the same ones who have knee-jerk reactions to anyone a little different from themselves. I would think anyone with the capacity to appreciate that sort of literature would also have the capacity to discuss, in a reasonably rational way, the pros and cons of immigration and the issues which surround it.
> If they so want to stay here, well, they should have started to naturalize. Period.
Naturalization is not allowed while on an H1-B visa. Permanent residence status ("green card") must be obtained first. Almost any H1-B visa holder would love to get permanent residence, but it's not that easy. Applications take years to process and have a high chance of refusal.
...then, as Michio Kaku suggests, we will have to slowly claw our way up from our current Type 0 civilization, to reach a Type III civilization or beyond. At that point, we should be able to steer our galaxy away from Andromeda, or perhaps merge the two cleanly in order to gain more energy sources to work with.
Protection from asteroids is a crucial first step in all of this. If we don't do that, we're toast, it's just a question of when the toaster's going to pop.
Sheesh, doesn't anyone around here read Greg Bear?
In related news, a federal ban on MP3-encoded electrons has been issued by Judge Lewis "I'll Censor Anything" Kaplan, of DeCSS trial fame.
In an attempt to enforce this ruling, the FBI is developing a so-called "killer" electron known as "Quantumvore". Pending regulatory approval, the FBI plans to release large numbers of Quantumvores into the Internet infrastructure, in order to seek out and destroy banned electrons. Quantumvore is actually a type of positively-charged anti-electron known as a positron, which upon coming into contact with an MP3-encoded electron will annihilate with a release of energy determined by Einstein's famous formula, E=mc^2.
A number of physicists have expressed serious concern that the sheer quantity of MP3-encoded electrons now thought to be in circulation could mean that the release of Quantumvore will result in large explosions occurring within milliseconds of each other in countless locations throughout the world. Simulations indicate that such explosions are likely to be centered on college dormitories, which in some cases may have sufficient concentrations of MP3-electrons to trigger chain reactions, which collectively would be capable of utterly destroying the Earth.
An RIAA spokesperson responded to these concerns by saying "Without strong intellectual property protection, and the ability for monopoly content brokers to maximize revenue, the Earth may as well not exist anyway."
Stay tuned for further developments in this breaking story...
And, no, it isn't something that your going to be able to strip out from network traffic, unless of course, the person doing the stripping is on your subnet, which is highly unlikely.
Whaddaya think Carnivore is for? Just email? Suuuuure!!;)
Actually, you're right, although it depends just how paranoid you want or need to be. If you were writing subversive code, you'd definitely want to avoid mac addresses in your code & binaries. In fact, didn't they use that against the Word macro virus writer in NJ (was that Melissa? I've lost track.)
On the other hand, you have to wonder if it really matters.
Forgive me quoting myself, but I just wrote a message about this, attached to the "Lawsuits Suck" article. To me, the important point is this:
"...having laws in place which everyone routinely breaks, provides yet another way in which the government can harass citizens if it so chooses. [...] Laws are instruments of control, and unnecessary laws are dangerous. They can sit on the books for years until the wrong person gets into a position to abuse them."
Gotta go hide, I hear some black helicopters outside...
I was referring to the algorithm used to generate GUID or UUID numbers, which is the most common form of identifier subject to this issue, and is used by DCE, CORBA, XPCOM, COM, and various other systems.
The ability of this algorithm to generate "globally" or "universally" unique identifiers relies in part on the fact that network adapters contain a node address which is issued in blocks to network card manufacturers by the IEEE, so is guaranteed to be unique. Here's some info about UUID generation.
While processor IDs can be used to identify a system, there currently isn't widespread use of these numbers in standard software components.
Then beyond threatening someone with violence, this individual should have no problem posting his/her thoughts on the web in the US.
One of us must be missing something here. If I write some code which is considered equally threatening to commercial interests as DeCSS, by posting it on my website, I risk prosecution and legal sanctions, assuming my code falls foul of the DMCA, UCITA, etc., which is not that difficult.
This might all be more acceptable if the function of the code in question were somehow inherently against the interests of society. However, I don't see that as being the case here. For further arguments along these lines, see this message and my reply to it.
Hell, if NAMBLA can have a PO box, anyone can.
Part of the point is that online, some of the freedoms that exist in the "real" world are disappearing. You may think that would be good, in the case of something like NAMBLA, but actually that's a good case in point. NAMBLA members aren't doing anything illegal until they actually break the law. The same thing used to be true of copy protection circumvention: you could sell and own copy protection circumvention equipment or software. That has now changed. It used to be legal to buy a device to circumvent Macrovision copy protection on videos. I bought one so I could play legally purchased DVDs on my PC, through my VCR (not to tape them, just to watch them.) I haven't checked for certain, but if these devices aren't already illegal under the DMCA, certainly their software equivalents are.
> There aren't any corporations selling DeCSS, though - why is that? Uh, maybe because its free?
Yeah, yeah. My point is that it's illegal under Federal law. A company selling DeCSS could be shut down in short order. Yes, you might be able to order a hooker online. But that's only because there aren't any big corporations who really care to stop you. That's not the case when it comes to the sort of "subversive" software raised by the original query.
I agree Napster isn't a perfect case - in part because it was ultimately about commercial profits, not individual freedom. I think Napster would have done better to take some actions to protect copyrighted works on its network, so that it could demonstrate some more widely acceptable primary use - but of course it wouldn't have been as popular, then. Napster's technical function is a useful and ultimately necessary one; but they did nothing to deter technically illegal abuses of their system.
Nevertheless, I see an element of civil disobedience amongst Napster users that goes beyond just the desire for "free stuff". Some see cheap justifications and rationalizations; I see at least some people who aren't necessarily articulating what's bothering them very well, or in the right places (mea culpa), but their actions speak for them. Mindlessly criminalizing this kind of activity won't ultimately help even those lobbying for the criminalization, as we both know.
[...]or their rights over their property (I'm not allowed to mp3 my song? But it's _my_ song, recorded it myself!).
I agree, this is one of the big danger areas. Actually, as copyright holder of your own work, you'll probably be allowed in theory to mp3 or dvd it, but getting access to the necessary tools could be another question. In the current climate, it's easy to envisage being forced to join the RIAA, pay dues, and use an approved publishing company, all to gain access to the technology required to create content that can be recognized by consumer players.
As long as it's about copying Britney Spears CDs without her permission it's a losing argument. But it _will_ escalate until the problems are so terrible that there's no more ground to give.
Agreed on both counts.
One ray of hope I see is that higher courts in the U.S., especially the Supreme Court, are often pretty good at handling this kind of thing. As long as the next president doesn't totally mess up the court, I fully expect some of these things (like code that's illegal?!) not to hold up.
Speaking of which, to bring this back to the original topic, now that particular bits of code have been declared illegal, I consider it virtually a moral duty to try to write such "subversive" code - otherwise, we are capitulating to an unacceptable restriction on freedom of thought, expression, and communication. I haven't thought of a suitable application yet, though, so the NSA and RIAA can sleep easy for another night!;^)
Do you consider DeCSS stealing? I consider it dangerous to criminalize something like, say, copying a DVD for backup purposes, or playing a DVD on a device which isn't officially approved. It's also dangerous to criminalize computer code.
I think the balance of power is seriously shifted in favor of corporations. It's not just a question of "stealing" copyrighted material, it's also about the customer's right to use that material in reasonable ways. Even though I don't agree with the use of Napster to perform large-scale free distribution of copyrighted work, I think things like Napster and DeCSS are important in order to reach some kind of acceptable balance on these issues, and ultimately to declaw UCITA, DMCA et al.
The identifying part usually comes from your network card, if you have one. (If you don't have one, you're actually fairly safe from this particular issue.) You could indeed use one network card to generate IDs, then hide it or destroy it, and use a different card the rest of the time. Or you could just generate IDs with your network card removed.
if there's money to be had, somneone, some company will back you.
What if there's no money to be had? What if the individual wants to do something that he believes is of social importance but doesn't have a great deal of direct monetary worth?
There are companies that let you gamble and buy drugs, steal music and videos, and hire prostitutes, all over the web. What on earth could you be doing thats is worse than this?
There aren't any corporations selling DeCSS, though - why is that?
Just because some corporations do subversive things, doesn't mean that there aren't any problems with developing subversive things, and it doesn't mean that individuals shouldn't consider the problems they might encounter doing something like that.
We're not hiding, we're attempting to preserve some freedoms.
I think the request arises from the sense that so much of what we do on the Net is monitored and/or discoverable after the fact, via technical or legal means. Freedoms that we take for granted in the "real" world - the ability to have a private conversation with someone, for example - largely don't exist when we're on the Net.
For those of us whose lives are heavily intertwined with the net, this is rather disturbing, and it's only natural - and important! - to think about how these controls could be circumvented if it became necessary.
The politicians, beaureaucrats and lawyers are busily trying to create a world in which criminals can't function. Unfortunately, at the same time, they're creating a world in which everyone is potentially a criminal (copying a DVD for a friend qualifies now, under the DMCA.) The result has the potential to be quite scary, even for law-abiding citizens.
Thoughts from a less obsessed cyclist
on
The Ultimate Bike
·
· Score: 2
Basically, it slows you down and that seems contradictory to the purpose.
"The purpose"? Sorry, dude, but the purpose is to get outside, enjoy some sunshine (or rain) and fresh air, beautiful scenery, get some exercise, and have fun. You're taking it way too seriously.
Re:US leads and the world follows
on
Lawsuits Suck
·
· Score: 3
The problem with this is that having laws in place which everyone routinely breaks, provides yet another way in which the government can harass citizens if it so chooses. That's what regularly happens in the U.S., anyway; I don't know about Australia, and I'm sure it hasn't happened yet with something as new as the censorware law.
A perfect example would be if the Aus government wanted to make an example of a hacker/cracker. Just charge her with not running censorware, downloading objectionable material, or whatever the law provides for, and give her the maximum sentence, even if whatever she might have actually done to annoy authorities would be hard to get a conviction for.
Laws are instruments of control, and unnecessary laws are dangerous. They can sit on the books for years until the wrong person gets into a position to abuse them.
isn't it time that the rest of the world gets their collective shit together and makes their own nation-states places worth staying?
I agree. I left my home country to come to the U.S. because of human rights issues. It's the lack of some real basics that keep many countries screwed up: democracy, education for all, human rights. The people who might be able to help aren't given a chance because of corrupt governments (no democracy) who don't have to respect human rights in order to maintain power, and because of populations for the most part who don't know any better (no education). You mentioned India and China - both have populations in the billion range. The technically literate ones are few relative to the total population, they just seem numerous to countries with 1/3 the population, like the U.S. And you can't build a big tech industry without a thriving underlying economy to employ it.
The answer? Right now, there doesn't seem to be one. It's going to take multiple generations for some of these countries to sort themselves out.
Just to clarify this, an H1-B visa holder would never be granted citizenship directly. The first step would be to get a so-called green card, which allows permanent residence in the United States, regardless of employer. If the "alien" then lives in the U.S. for five years without committing any significant crimes, only then can s/he apply for U.S. citizenship. Pretty much anyone who applies for citizenship will get it, assuming they pass the test and basic requirements. It's getting the green card that's the hard part.
Slashdot Mirror
"This is the kind of bullshit thinking that drives companies out of America and to the waiting hands of Countries that welcome them for being just a company,"
and then you say: "QA is very crucial for what I do, so I believe I am right in my thoughts."
It seems to me your thoughts could do with a bit of clarification.
No, this is the kind of thinking that turns American corporations in global behemoths capable of crushing all competition. If open source wants to compete, ultimately it'll need to use some of the same techniques. Don't just dismiss QA because nothing you've ever done was important enough to need it...
I mean, what could be better than weekend-all-night popcorn, DVD 'n' Quake sessions?
I live with my geek girlfriend, and her PC is in the living room with a DVD-ROM hooked up to the TV. She also has a better graphics card than mine (to support a Hauppage WinTV card), so I use her machine to play things like Quake, when she lets me. We regularly stay up till 4am surfing and programming. So I guess I have a geek house where nGeeks == 2.
I think we need ways of quantifying or rating geek houses: number of geeks, total feet of cat5, total wattage of data-carrying em radiation, total GB, MHz, etc.
...that the idea of geeks congregating in special houses is inherently funny!
As to the actual H1-B issue, I agree the program is highly flawed, as is immigration as a whole in the U.S. My personal bias is that they should consider offering green cards to more people on the basis of merit, rather than purely on things like employment sponsorship. Right now, there are a few categories like "Alien of exceptional merit and ability" which are open to quite small numbers of people, who have had major achievements like winning awards and such. If they opened this up a little, to grant expedited green cards (provisional or otherwise) to people with demonstrable skills, the H1-B program could be virtually disbanded.
However, this idea seems to be at odds with the vision of the U.S. as a refuge for the downtrodden and oppressed; and it's at odds with those who just don't want to let more people in, so it comes under attack from both sides of the political spectrum.
I wonder if that's not the real reason that corps aren't pushing for more permanent immigration: they know it won't fly, since it implies discrimination against relatively unskilled immigrants on an unprecedented scale.
When it comes to the issue of wage competition from immigrants in general (as opposed to exploited H1-B's), I really think that's a red herring. I don't believe that the tech job market is a zero-sum game. The more highly skilled tech people there are in the U.S. (or any country), the more productive all its businesses will be, and the better off the country will be as a whole.
I've always assumed this was two different subpopulations on /. Any time immigration is raised as an issue, you get a lot of mostly AC's posting inarticulate and ignorant cliche-ridden messages effectively expressing the sentiment "me good; dang furriners bad."
In real life and on /., this sentiment invariably comes from people who are lacking in various assets or abilities, whether it be communication, education, intelligence, socialization, or whatever. It seems fairly obvious why they would feel threatened by people smarter and more ambitious than they are, coming to the U.S. to compete for jobs and other resources.
But I've always retained the fond hope that the /.ers who read HHGTTG, Neal Stephenson, etc., aren't the same ones who have knee-jerk reactions to anyone a little different from themselves. I would think anyone with the capacity to appreciate that sort of literature would also have the capacity to discuss, in a reasonably rational way, the pros and cons of immigration and the issues which surround it.
Call me an idealist!
Naturalization is not allowed while on an H1-B visa. Permanent residence status ("green card") must be obtained first. Almost any H1-B visa holder would love to get permanent residence, but it's not that easy. Applications take years to process and have a high chance of refusal.
Looks like Fascdot is offering a try-before-you-buy deal to the trolls interested in buying his nick on ebay! :?)
Protection from asteroids is a crucial first step in all of this. If we don't do that, we're toast, it's just a question of when the toaster's going to pop.
Sheesh, doesn't anyone around here read Greg Bear?
In an attempt to enforce this ruling, the FBI is developing a so-called "killer" electron known as "Quantumvore". Pending regulatory approval, the FBI plans to release large numbers of Quantumvores into the Internet infrastructure, in order to seek out and destroy banned electrons. Quantumvore is actually a type of positively-charged anti-electron known as a positron, which upon coming into contact with an MP3-encoded electron will annihilate with a release of energy determined by Einstein's famous formula, E=mc^2.
A number of physicists have expressed serious concern that the sheer quantity of MP3-encoded electrons now thought to be in circulation could mean that the release of Quantumvore will result in large explosions occurring within milliseconds of each other in countless locations throughout the world. Simulations indicate that such explosions are likely to be centered on college dormitories, which in some cases may have sufficient concentrations of MP3-electrons to trigger chain reactions, which collectively would be capable of utterly destroying the Earth.
An RIAA spokesperson responded to these concerns by saying "Without strong intellectual property protection, and the ability for monopoly content brokers to maximize revenue, the Earth may as well not exist anyway."
Stay tuned for further developments in this breaking story...
Whaddaya think Carnivore is for? Just email? Suuuuure!! ;)
Actually, you're right, although it depends just how paranoid you want or need to be. If you were writing subversive code, you'd definitely want to avoid mac addresses in your code & binaries. In fact, didn't they use that against the Word macro virus writer in NJ (was that Melissa? I've lost track.)
I can just see the /. headlines in 2007: "Conflict due to manually-altered GUID causes global Internet crash! 'Told you so!', says Bob Metcalfe."
Forgive me quoting myself, but I just wrote a message about this, attached to the "Lawsuits Suck" article. To me, the important point is this:
"...having laws in place which everyone routinely breaks, provides yet another way in which the government can harass citizens if it so chooses. [...] Laws are instruments of control, and unnecessary laws are dangerous. They can sit on the books for years until the wrong person gets into a position to abuse them."
Gotta go hide, I hear some black helicopters outside...
The ability of this algorithm to generate "globally" or "universally" unique identifiers relies in part on the fact that network adapters contain a node address which is issued in blocks to network card manufacturers by the IEEE, so is guaranteed to be unique. Here's some info about UUID generation.
While processor IDs can be used to identify a system, there currently isn't widespread use of these numbers in standard software components.
One of us must be missing something here. If I write some code which is considered equally threatening to commercial interests as DeCSS, by posting it on my website, I risk prosecution and legal sanctions, assuming my code falls foul of the DMCA, UCITA, etc., which is not that difficult.
This might all be more acceptable if the function of the code in question were somehow inherently against the interests of society. However, I don't see that as being the case here. For further arguments along these lines, see this message and my reply to it.
Hell, if NAMBLA can have a PO box, anyone can.
Part of the point is that online, some of the freedoms that exist in the "real" world are disappearing. You may think that would be good, in the case of something like NAMBLA, but actually that's a good case in point. NAMBLA members aren't doing anything illegal until they actually break the law. The same thing used to be true of copy protection circumvention: you could sell and own copy protection circumvention equipment or software. That has now changed. It used to be legal to buy a device to circumvent Macrovision copy protection on videos. I bought one so I could play legally purchased DVDs on my PC, through my VCR (not to tape them, just to watch them.) I haven't checked for certain, but if these devices aren't already illegal under the DMCA, certainly their software equivalents are.
> There aren't any corporations selling DeCSS, though - why is that?
Uh, maybe because its free?
Yeah, yeah. My point is that it's illegal under Federal law. A company selling DeCSS could be shut down in short order. Yes, you might be able to order a hooker online. But that's only because there aren't any big corporations who really care to stop you. That's not the case when it comes to the sort of "subversive" software raised by the original query.
Nevertheless, I see an element of civil disobedience amongst Napster users that goes beyond just the desire for "free stuff". Some see cheap justifications and rationalizations; I see at least some people who aren't necessarily articulating what's bothering them very well, or in the right places (mea culpa), but their actions speak for them. Mindlessly criminalizing this kind of activity won't ultimately help even those lobbying for the criminalization, as we both know.
[...]or their rights over their property (I'm not allowed to mp3 my song? But it's _my_ song, recorded it myself!).
I agree, this is one of the big danger areas. Actually, as copyright holder of your own work, you'll probably be allowed in theory to mp3 or dvd it, but getting access to the necessary tools could be another question. In the current climate, it's easy to envisage being forced to join the RIAA, pay dues, and use an approved publishing company, all to gain access to the technology required to create content that can be recognized by consumer players.
As long as it's about copying Britney Spears CDs without her permission it's a losing argument. But it _will_ escalate until the problems are so terrible that there's no more ground to give.
Agreed on both counts.
One ray of hope I see is that higher courts in the U.S., especially the Supreme Court, are often pretty good at handling this kind of thing. As long as the next president doesn't totally mess up the court, I fully expect some of these things (like code that's illegal?!) not to hold up.
Speaking of which, to bring this back to the original topic, now that particular bits of code have been declared illegal, I consider it virtually a moral duty to try to write such "subversive" code - otherwise, we are capitulating to an unacceptable restriction on freedom of thought, expression, and communication. I haven't thought of a suitable application yet, though, so the NSA and RIAA can sleep easy for another night! ;^)
I think the balance of power is seriously shifted in favor of corporations. It's not just a question of "stealing" copyrighted material, it's also about the customer's right to use that material in reasonable ways. Even though I don't agree with the use of Napster to perform large-scale free distribution of copyrighted work, I think things like Napster and DeCSS are important in order to reach some kind of acceptable balance on these issues, and ultimately to declaw UCITA, DMCA et al.
The identifying part usually comes from your network card, if you have one. (If you don't have one, you're actually fairly safe from this particular issue.) You could indeed use one network card to generate IDs, then hide it or destroy it, and use a different card the rest of the time. Or you could just generate IDs with your network card removed.
What if there's no money to be had? What if the individual wants to do something that he believes is of social importance but doesn't have a great deal of direct monetary worth?
There are companies that let you gamble and buy drugs, steal music and videos, and hire prostitutes, all over the web. What on earth could you be doing thats is worse than this?
There aren't any corporations selling DeCSS, though - why is that?
Just because some corporations do subversive things, doesn't mean that there aren't any problems with developing subversive things, and it doesn't mean that individuals shouldn't consider the problems they might encounter doing something like that.
I think the request arises from the sense that so much of what we do on the Net is monitored and/or discoverable after the fact, via technical or legal means. Freedoms that we take for granted in the "real" world - the ability to have a private conversation with someone, for example - largely don't exist when we're on the Net.
For those of us whose lives are heavily intertwined with the net, this is rather disturbing, and it's only natural - and important! - to think about how these controls could be circumvented if it became necessary.
The politicians, beaureaucrats and lawyers are busily trying to create a world in which criminals can't function. Unfortunately, at the same time, they're creating a world in which everyone is potentially a criminal (copying a DVD for a friend qualifies now, under the DMCA.) The result has the potential to be quite scary, even for law-abiding citizens.
"The purpose"? Sorry, dude, but the purpose is to get outside, enjoy some sunshine (or rain) and fresh air, beautiful scenery, get some exercise, and have fun. You're taking it way too seriously.
A perfect example would be if the Aus government wanted to make an example of a hacker/cracker. Just charge her with not running censorware, downloading objectionable material, or whatever the law provides for, and give her the maximum sentence, even if whatever she might have actually done to annoy authorities would be hard to get a conviction for.
Laws are instruments of control, and unnecessary laws are dangerous. They can sit on the books for years until the wrong person gets into a position to abuse them.
Neither are green card holders. You have to live in the U.S. for five years with a green card before you can apply for citizenship.
I agree. I left my home country to come to the U.S. because of human rights issues. It's the lack of some real basics that keep many countries screwed up: democracy, education for all, human rights. The people who might be able to help aren't given a chance because of corrupt governments (no democracy) who don't have to respect human rights in order to maintain power, and because of populations for the most part who don't know any better (no education). You mentioned India and China - both have populations in the billion range. The technically literate ones are few relative to the total population, they just seem numerous to countries with 1/3 the population, like the U.S. And you can't build a big tech industry without a thriving underlying economy to employ it.
The answer? Right now, there doesn't seem to be one. It's going to take multiple generations for some of these countries to sort themselves out.
Just to clarify this, an H1-B visa holder would never be granted citizenship directly. The first step would be to get a so-called green card, which allows permanent residence in the United States, regardless of employer. If the "alien" then lives in the U.S. for five years without committing any significant crimes, only then can s/he apply for U.S. citizenship. Pretty much anyone who applies for citizenship will get it, assuming they pass the test and basic requirements. It's getting the green card that's the hard part.