As someone who has had a startup in the past, I can tell you that of course that is the case.
In fact, when you look for angel investor or VC funding, one of the key elements that they consider is the background and pedigree of the founders.
Your past experience, expertise, education (especially education) and pedigree (a well known school is easier to sell than a relatively unknown one) all play a big role in who you can talk to, and how seriously they will take you.
Even when you talk to a potential client, they are interested in knowing your background. An seventeen year old high-school dropout telling a company's CEO that he has a panacea to the company's problems may happen in movies, but rarely in real life.
Being able to install Linux or code in PHP or hack the kernel does not necessarily equate to understanding business needs.
That said, if you have a truly unique and good idea, you may succeed without any of the above -- but that is rare, and few and far between.
You assume everyone likes something that pays a lot of money. Most people like stuff which COSTS money and which wont earn them a dime.
Not necessarily true.
I love mountaineering, and it takes a lot of time, energy and effort. On top of everything, even a single piece of equipment can mean the difference between life and death, so everything is extremely expensive. Hell, we were planning on an expedition to climb Denali, and the basic budget came up to around $20,000, not including time off. And Everest? You can forget it, unless you're either really, really good and can get sponsorship or are really, really rich.
And my hobby is not going to earn me a dime, not unless I plan on becoming a guide. And even then, not so much.
Also, why do you say we should focus on being happy but you, and others who think like you, aren't doing anything to reduce the current 40-80 hour work week down to 20 hours?
Because what translates into happiness for you need not translate into happiness for me. I work 80-100 hour weeks because when I do get downtime, it is well deserved, and I make enough to give me the flexibility to do the things I enjoy in life.
What if spending time with my family makes me happy? In that case in order to be happy I'd have to work less. So it becomes impossible to find happiness while also being a provider.
Here is the deal - make your choice. If being with your family is more important, then by all means be with them. However, if making more money for whatever reason is important, then make more money. You have to make a choice.
Sure, you can hang halfway between, and several people do so. But in the long run, you tend to be unfair to both yourself, and to your family.
Me? I've made my choice. I am a workaholic, and I'm in an industry where it's strictly up or out. And I work 80-100 hour weeks, and I enjoy it. I probably will not do this after my 40s, but until then, it is work hard and play hard. I couldn't see myself doing anything else.
No one works for the money, we work for our families.
Speak for yourself.
I mean, my family is important, but they can take care of themselves well enough. I work because I like having money. Lots of money. I'm not putting in 80-100 hour weeks and putting up with crap so that I can be all nice and sacrificial. I'm doing it so that I can buy that beach house, that jet and that yacht.
Re:Family is all that matters in life.
on
Disillusioned With IT?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If your job pays good money, be a man and provider and sacrifice your happiness so your child can have a better life.
What a load of horse dung. There is nothing "manly" about being unhappy and dissatisfied.
Here's a better alternative - be smart, and research into what you like and make a plan to go towards it. That way, you are working towards a goal. And when you finally do accomplish it, you'd be happier for it.
The whole "be a man" and do stupid things for life is the biggest load of nonsense I've heard.
My Dad quit his job as a banker and became a lawyer when I was in school, and now he's very successful and quite happy. My Mom quit her job when she had me, and went back to being a daytrader.
My girlfriend is in premed and we're thinking of getting married and having kids -- but that does not mean that I do not plan on going to business school sometime, or that she's not planning on doing medicine.
You can have both. You just need to be smart about it.
As a Blackberry user, I looked at getting an iPhone, but a brief conversation with IT basically told me that I'd lose all the advantages of having a smartphone with an iPhone (i.e. can't do push email, can't sync my calendar, no VPN, can't implement security etc).
I gave up at that point. While the iPhone is a very sexy and sleek toy, it's just that - a toy gadget. From a corporate user's utilitarian perspective, a Blackberry kicks ass.
Just an FYI, but about 95% of my iPhone internet/email use occurs at work, home, or in a couple of local restaurants... ALL of which are WiFi enabled. So while EDGE is a bit pokey elsewhere, by and large it doesn't matter, because event though 3G beats EDGE, WiFi beats 3G.
You probably don't travel much.:)
About 30% of my email happens in the airports, another 10% in hotels and restaurants and about 45% on client sites where I can't really plonk down my notebook and start checking my mail. Perhaps 10% of my email checking happens at home, and about 5% at my office. How many of these places have wifi? Well, home is the only one which I've setup. Clients, hotels and airports change so frequently that I don't even bother with them (unless I'm at a client all too often).
The biggest reason why I love my Blackberry is because when I do have free time, I am not constrained about something coming up - I can actually go out, and if something comes up, I'll know. Also, it nicely syncs up with my calendar, which is *awesome* because I can combine my personal and work calendars into one, and it's one place with everything.
And my Blackberry has a GMail client, and IM clients, as well as Google Maps and basic Google search. There's not a whole lot more I need, really. I can play my music, I can do the two most important things (i.e. email and calendar) and I can check my personal email, and do IM if needed. On top of that, I can use my favorite search engine find directions if needed.
To me, anything else is nice-to-have, but I probably won't ever use it. Well, maybe for the first two days if I have a moment or two.
An iPhone is great for fun, but from a utilitarian perspective, I cannot have (corporate) push-email, it does not sync with the corporate calendar and so on. So, its use is immensely limited to me as a business user. On top of that, IT is leery of the iPhone from a security perspective (mostly because they cannot push their security policies on your phone).
Now going back to your point on connectivity, I think that EDGE sucks - and while WiFi is great, it doesn't really matter for most business travelers (at least my kind). Now, that is where 3G comes in, in my opinion. I want something that works in the airports, hotels and on the road - and something that is reliable. I don't need large amounts of data for viewing videos - I just need to know when I get an important client call or an email from a partner (or girlfriend:)).
But that is part of the problem. If someone paid a premium for a good education, they expect to be compensated accordingly.
I'm not necessarily saying that I have a solution in place, but just that if someone comes up with a cure and demands an exorbitant price, it is within their right to do so. It may not be ethical by someone's guidelines, but it is still within their right to do so.
Now, there are several people who are spreading diseases because they cannot afford medicine, and I realize that. But their needing cure does not warrant companies and individuals giving up their work for free. If companies or individuals want to, that is fine - if they do not, there needs to be fundamental economic change to raise them to the level where they are given health care, as opposed to change a system of development that actually works.
Who am I to deny them? I'm nobody - but I am an individual member of the society who approves of the current mechanism society has in place to handle its problems. You blaming society's problems on systems you disagree with or attributing denial to individuals is ironic at best and sad at worst.
You're missing the point. Like I said, developers and programmers aren't particularly expensive, and that's fine.
However, people who've advanced degrees and expertise in highly specialized areas are expensive, and that is part of the reason why medicine gets so expensive.
My girlfriend is in starting premed and the fees are already over the top. After med-school, do I really see her working for free? Hell no.
Oh, working for a great cause sounds fantastic, but it is not realistic given the amount of debt that you are in, coming out of school.
Your argument on equipment is quite silly - and is a logical fallacy. Just because you have a couple of examples where people did not use them does not necessarily invalidate their use.
A lot may be achieved without the gear, but a lot more can be achieved with them. It's called progress.
Those people (doctors sans frontiers) are there for charity - and I've heard of enough heartbreak cases from them, as well.
Do you have a more coherent argument than bringing up examples of someone who did something contrary and saying that just because these people do, everyone else must?
If anything, I'm proud of capitalism. If I do something, why shouldn't I be expected to be rewarded for it? If I develop a cure, what is wrong in asking people to pay for it? If anything, the system promotes competition and ensures that the brightest rise to the top.
Now, there may be exceptions and there may be people who have done great things without any help. But even these people (like Mr. Torvalds) need a day job where they can get paid for what they do.
I do not understand your comment on quality people because quality people may find ways of expressing themselves, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't ask to be paid for it.
Except for the fact that the amount of resources required to conduct research (particularly pharma research) is over the top.
You can't just hire a bunch of folks who spent 10 years going to school and ask them to produce something for "free". Also, that electron microscope or that gene sequencer does not grow on a tree.
Software is a little different, but even then, programmers aren't the same as computer scientists. And while being paid for a service is great, I still do not mind paying for good technology because it pays for someone who loves technology.
I am all for making everything available freely, but I believe that the market should determine if that is feasible. Viva la Laissez-faire!
That is perhaps one of the most insightful comments I've ever read on Slashdot.
Most people don't quite look at it that way, but you've got a point there - folks automatically assume that just because people support a regime that does bad things, the same people will suffer under that regime. That is not necessarily true. The reason they select the regime is because bad things happen to "others" that they've been conditioned to hate (brown people, Muslims, immigrants, whatever).
The Christian right is no different. The average Joe Republican is probably rejoicing at Gitmo and the fallout of our human rights, because hey, he's not affected - it's "someone" else. And if he does get pulled over, he feels proud that he's helping the system further its goals.
It is usually the powerless ones who are always affected - Jews, minorities and in today's America, the non-citizens. And I am particularly riled up about this because I'm typing this from an airport in Texas, where as a "brown man", I was "randomly selected" to be searched. Yet again. I told the guy that I travel twice a week, and that in the past couple of weeks, I've been "randomly selected" at Texas almost every single time. His answer? "Do you tell the cop that you've never gotten caught speeding except when he's patrolling"
I was at a loss for words, and this is the irony of it all.
Secondly, pedigree matters. No matter what people say, it is very important, especially down the line if you wish to go to business school, or pursue higher education.
I've been following BB long before it became famous - Doctorow is a mediocre writer, and someone who tries to be an activist to try and garner attention.
Have you tried posting anything on BB that he considers inappropriate?
Now, BB is a great blog - but that alone does not make much of what Doctorow does worth much. Unfortunately, he's got his own following of like-minded Trotskyist nutjobs.
Forced intellectual labor and slavery - you can phrase it however you want, but you're advocating second grade citizenry for people who spent years laboring in graduate school for the privilege of staying in this country.
I wonder when and where this country became so morally decrepit. Land of immigrants, indeed.
I dare say that is because there is a large majority of foreign national students that pay significantly less than their domestic counterparts for that graduate school education. It's quite well-known that foreign nationals can get free rides to top schools (via government grants they don't have to repay) here while domestic students struggle just to get financial aid that might cover 1/3rd of the total cost. Basically, our tax dollars subsidize their education, living expenses, etc and then they compete for our jobs against our own students who are now so far in debt that it takes them years to dig themselves out. Oh, and then they can just skip on back to their native countries, and open companies that directly compete with our own.
As a foreign national who went to a top school, I can assure you that this is not the case. In fact, I had to turn down the admission from another top school because I simply could not afford the fees. While I did have a Graduate Research Assistantship, so did several people in graduate school. In fact, it was harder for foreign nationals because we could not work more than 20 hours a week, and we had to get jobs that were within the campus. American nationals had no such limitations, and they could intern elsewhere, and could get jobs just about anywhere. Also, the fees for international students tends to be a lot higher than fees for Americans. As an American, even if you are an out of state resident, you can stay in the locale of the school for a while and become a resident. As a foreign national, even if you've been doing your PhD for 10 years, you are still considered an out of state resident and you pay full, out of state fees (plus more) as an international student.
And while skipping back and going to the home country sounds like a fantastic idea on paper (and I've seen a lot of comments on this article mention that), it is not realistic. Do you really think that it is easy to leave everything and just go back after spending a few years here? In fact, the biggest reason a lot of folks go back is for the final reason that you mentioned - i.e. starting their own companies. And why is that? Because the US immigration system is so screwed up that as a foreign national, I cannot start my own company without going through hell and high water. This coming from someone who started two companies, and gave up on both because the effort wasn't worth it.
To your point about them not being cheap: That's because they are allowed to take salary, and can be covered by the same benefit packages, etc that their domestic counterparts fall under, yet their living expenses are sometimes totally covered by government handouts.
Wrong again. Foreign nationals get absolutely no special treatment. In fact, if I lose my job, I've to fly out of the country within ten days, and I do not even get social security or unemployment (even though I paid taxes just like everyone else).
They then wonder why domestic students don't bother with the more expensive routes of getting a Master's/Doctorate in engineering or other high-tech disciplines. It's laughable. They created the mess with outsourcing domestic jobs and importing cheap students/labor. Thank our wonderful government officials and corporate overlords for the fine kettle of fish we find ourselves in.
By the way, our educational system takes some of the blame for this as well. When you have people that think things like "New Math", "No Child Left Behind", "Ebonics" and allowing calculators for basic math (on tests at that), are all good ideas, then you know we have some real rotten apples in the barrel someplace. Education should not be a social experiment or cater to the lowest common denominator.
When was the last time you've actually read about any student becoming a "Renaissance Man"? We're sorely lacking something in this day and age when our best and brightest spend more time on YouTube or MySpace than learning multiple languages (verbal o
Yes, administrator/politician uses words of a billionaire technologist to highlight an issue that needed change. Which would make sense, considering that the interests of the billionaire technologist are affected by the said issue. Not to mention that the billionaire also brings in significant amount of revenue and whose company is a core-contributor to the country's economy (if not the world's).
Don't even bother. The majority of Slashdotters would claim that going to a college is a waste, and would wear their badge of illiteracy with honor, stating that they've learnt everything that there is to learn without setting foot in college. And then they'll tell you how their experience and wonderful geekiness sets them apart from the rest.
And you're right about the need for intelligent people with good academic credentials. I know several companies that are looking for people in EE/ECE related fields with graduate degrees - it is almost impossible to find good candidates, and almost 80% of the folks tend to be Indian or Chinese. I remember a graduate class in Quantum Computing - out of a class of 18, there were all of 2 Americans* in there.
*Never mind the fact that a lot of people who go to school here eventually identify themselves with an American cultural identity, and call themselves Americans anyway -- what's the point of discrimination then, I wonder?
So, you're basically advocating exploiting them, thinking that they'd do anything to stay in this country.
Rather, let us exploit intelligent, foreign nationals who come here for an education by treating them as second-grade folks compared to American citizens. Nice! What happened to the US that once asked for the tired, hungry and poor masses, I wonder.
I do not know what's sadder, Slashdot responses like yours or idiots who actually believe in the kind of rubbish that you come up with.
Slashdot Mirror
As someone who has had a startup in the past, I can tell you that of course that is the case.
In fact, when you look for angel investor or VC funding, one of the key elements that they consider is the background and pedigree of the founders.
Your past experience, expertise, education (especially education) and pedigree (a well known school is easier to sell than a relatively unknown one) all play a big role in who you can talk to, and how seriously they will take you.
Even when you talk to a potential client, they are interested in knowing your background. An seventeen year old high-school dropout telling a company's CEO that he has a panacea to the company's problems may happen in movies, but rarely in real life.
Being able to install Linux or code in PHP or hack the kernel does not necessarily equate to understanding business needs.
That said, if you have a truly unique and good idea, you may succeed without any of the above -- but that is rare, and few and far between.
No, unlikely.
I'm in the US and I've been having similar issues.
Well, that's poor design - blinking bright green on black? :-\
ESR's HTML Hell page comes to mind.
Excellent thought.
It's always good to hear classical (instrumental) compositions, and I'm reminded of Markos Moulitsas' music (the Daily Kos guy).
If it sounds good and has talent behind it, I'm more than happy to pay.
Not necessarily true.
I love mountaineering, and it takes a lot of time, energy and effort. On top of everything, even a single piece of equipment can mean the difference between life and death, so everything is extremely expensive. Hell, we were planning on an expedition to climb Denali, and the basic budget came up to around $20,000, not including time off. And Everest? You can forget it, unless you're either really, really good and can get sponsorship or are really, really rich.
And my hobby is not going to earn me a dime, not unless I plan on becoming a guide. And even then, not so much. Because what translates into happiness for you need not translate into happiness for me. I work 80-100 hour weeks because when I do get downtime, it is well deserved, and I make enough to give me the flexibility to do the things I enjoy in life. Here is the deal - make your choice. If being with your family is more important, then by all means be with them. However, if making more money for whatever reason is important, then make more money. You have to make a choice.
Sure, you can hang halfway between, and several people do so. But in the long run, you tend to be unfair to both yourself, and to your family.
Me? I've made my choice. I am a workaholic, and I'm in an industry where it's strictly up or out. And I work 80-100 hour weeks, and I enjoy it. I probably will not do this after my 40s, but until then, it is work hard and play hard. I couldn't see myself doing anything else.
I mean, my family is important, but they can take care of themselves well enough. I work because I like having money. Lots of money. I'm not putting in 80-100 hour weeks and putting up with crap so that I can be all nice and sacrificial. I'm doing it so that I can buy that beach house, that jet and that yacht.
Here's a better alternative - be smart, and research into what you like and make a plan to go towards it. That way, you are working towards a goal. And when you finally do accomplish it, you'd be happier for it.
The whole "be a man" and do stupid things for life is the biggest load of nonsense I've heard.
My Dad quit his job as a banker and became a lawyer when I was in school, and now he's very successful and quite happy. My Mom quit her job when she had me, and went back to being a daytrader.
My girlfriend is in premed and we're thinking of getting married and having kids -- but that does not mean that I do not plan on going to business school sometime, or that she's not planning on doing medicine.
You can have both. You just need to be smart about it.
Very well said - couldn't agree more.
As a Blackberry user, I looked at getting an iPhone, but a brief conversation with IT basically told me that I'd lose all the advantages of having a smartphone with an iPhone (i.e. can't do push email, can't sync my calendar, no VPN, can't implement security etc).
I gave up at that point. While the iPhone is a very sexy and sleek toy, it's just that - a toy gadget. From a corporate user's utilitarian perspective, a Blackberry kicks ass.
About 30% of my email happens in the airports, another 10% in hotels and restaurants and about 45% on client sites where I can't really plonk down my notebook and start checking my mail. Perhaps 10% of my email checking happens at home, and about 5% at my office. How many of these places have wifi? Well, home is the only one which I've setup. Clients, hotels and airports change so frequently that I don't even bother with them (unless I'm at a client all too often).
The biggest reason why I love my Blackberry is because when I do have free time, I am not constrained about something coming up - I can actually go out, and if something comes up, I'll know. Also, it nicely syncs up with my calendar, which is *awesome* because I can combine my personal and work calendars into one, and it's one place with everything.
And my Blackberry has a GMail client, and IM clients, as well as Google Maps and basic Google search. There's not a whole lot more I need, really. I can play my music, I can do the two most important things (i.e. email and calendar) and I can check my personal email, and do IM if needed. On top of that, I can use my favorite search engine find directions if needed.
To me, anything else is nice-to-have, but I probably won't ever use it. Well, maybe for the first two days if I have a moment or two.
An iPhone is great for fun, but from a utilitarian perspective, I cannot have (corporate) push-email, it does not sync with the corporate calendar and so on. So, its use is immensely limited to me as a business user. On top of that, IT is leery of the iPhone from a security perspective (mostly because they cannot push their security policies on your phone).
Now going back to your point on connectivity, I think that EDGE sucks - and while WiFi is great, it doesn't really matter for most business travelers (at least my kind). Now, that is where 3G comes in, in my opinion. I want something that works in the airports, hotels and on the road - and something that is reliable. I don't need large amounts of data for viewing videos - I just need to know when I get an important client call or an email from a partner (or girlfriend
But that is part of the problem. If someone paid a premium for a good education, they expect to be compensated accordingly.
I'm not necessarily saying that I have a solution in place, but just that if someone comes up with a cure and demands an exorbitant price, it is within their right to do so. It may not be ethical by someone's guidelines, but it is still within their right to do so.
Now, there are several people who are spreading diseases because they cannot afford medicine, and I realize that. But their needing cure does not warrant companies and individuals giving up their work for free. If companies or individuals want to, that is fine - if they do not, there needs to be fundamental economic change to raise them to the level where they are given health care, as opposed to change a system of development that actually works.
Who am I to deny them? I'm nobody - but I am an individual member of the society who approves of the current mechanism society has in place to handle its problems. You blaming society's problems on systems you disagree with or attributing denial to individuals is ironic at best and sad at worst.
You're missing the point. Like I said, developers and programmers aren't particularly expensive, and that's fine.
However, people who've advanced degrees and expertise in highly specialized areas are expensive, and that is part of the reason why medicine gets so expensive.
My girlfriend is in starting premed and the fees are already over the top. After med-school, do I really see her working for free? Hell no.
Oh, working for a great cause sounds fantastic, but it is not realistic given the amount of debt that you are in, coming out of school.
Your argument on equipment is quite silly - and is a logical fallacy. Just because you have a couple of examples where people did not use them does not necessarily invalidate their use.
A lot may be achieved without the gear, but a lot more can be achieved with them. It's called progress.
Those people (doctors sans frontiers) are there for charity - and I've heard of enough heartbreak cases from them, as well.
Do you have a more coherent argument than bringing up examples of someone who did something contrary and saying that just because these people do, everyone else must?
If anything, I'm proud of capitalism. If I do something, why shouldn't I be expected to be rewarded for it? If I develop a cure, what is wrong in asking people to pay for it? If anything, the system promotes competition and ensures that the brightest rise to the top.
Now, there may be exceptions and there may be people who have done great things without any help. But even these people (like Mr. Torvalds) need a day job where they can get paid for what they do.
I do not understand your comment on quality people because quality people may find ways of expressing themselves, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't ask to be paid for it.
Except for the fact that the amount of resources required to conduct research (particularly pharma research) is over the top.
You can't just hire a bunch of folks who spent 10 years going to school and ask them to produce something for "free". Also, that electron microscope or that gene sequencer does not grow on a tree.
Software is a little different, but even then, programmers aren't the same as computer scientists. And while being paid for a service is great, I still do not mind paying for good technology because it pays for someone who loves technology.
I am all for making everything available freely, but I believe that the market should determine if that is feasible. Viva la Laissez-faire!
That is perhaps one of the most insightful comments I've ever read on Slashdot.
Most people don't quite look at it that way, but you've got a point there - folks automatically assume that just because people support a regime that does bad things, the same people will suffer under that regime. That is not necessarily true. The reason they select the regime is because bad things happen to "others" that they've been conditioned to hate (brown people, Muslims, immigrants, whatever).
The Christian right is no different. The average Joe Republican is probably rejoicing at Gitmo and the fallout of our human rights, because hey, he's not affected - it's "someone" else. And if he does get pulled over, he feels proud that he's helping the system further its goals.
It is usually the powerless ones who are always affected - Jews, minorities and in today's America, the non-citizens. And I am particularly riled up about this because I'm typing this from an airport in Texas, where as a "brown man", I was "randomly selected" to be searched. Yet again. I told the guy that I travel twice a week, and that in the past couple of weeks, I've been "randomly selected" at Texas almost every single time. His answer? "Do you tell the cop that you've never gotten caught speeding except when he's patrolling"
I was at a loss for words, and this is the irony of it all.
Indeed.
Secondly, pedigree matters. No matter what people say, it is very important, especially down the line if you wish to go to business school, or pursue higher education.
If Cory's a journalist, I'm a bloody economist for blogging about economics.
Gee.
Couldn't agree more.
I've been following BB long before it became famous - Doctorow is a mediocre writer, and someone who tries to be an activist to try and garner attention.
Have you tried posting anything on BB that he considers inappropriate?
Now, BB is a great blog - but that alone does not make much of what Doctorow does worth much. Unfortunately, he's got his own following of like-minded Trotskyist nutjobs.
Forced intellectual labor and slavery - you can phrase it however you want, but you're advocating second grade citizenry for people who spent years laboring in graduate school for the privilege of staying in this country.
I wonder when and where this country became so morally decrepit. Land of immigrants, indeed.
American real wages aren't rising - if anything, they are going down.
As a foreign national who went to a top school, I can assure you that this is not the case. In fact, I had to turn down the admission from another top school because I simply could not afford the fees. While I did have a Graduate Research Assistantship, so did several people in graduate school. In fact, it was harder for foreign nationals because we could not work more than 20 hours a week, and we had to get jobs that were within the campus. American nationals had no such limitations, and they could intern elsewhere, and could get jobs just about anywhere. Also, the fees for international students tends to be a lot higher than fees for Americans. As an American, even if you are an out of state resident, you can stay in the locale of the school for a while and become a resident. As a foreign national, even if you've been doing your PhD for 10 years, you are still considered an out of state resident and you pay full, out of state fees (plus more) as an international student.
And while skipping back and going to the home country sounds like a fantastic idea on paper (and I've seen a lot of comments on this article mention that), it is not realistic. Do you really think that it is easy to leave everything and just go back after spending a few years here? In fact, the biggest reason a lot of folks go back is for the final reason that you mentioned - i.e. starting their own companies. And why is that? Because the US immigration system is so screwed up that as a foreign national, I cannot start my own company without going through hell and high water. This coming from someone who started two companies, and gave up on both because the effort wasn't worth it.
Wrong again. Foreign nationals get absolutely no special treatment. In fact, if I lose my job, I've to fly out of the country within ten days, and I do not even get social security or unemployment (even though I paid taxes just like everyone else).
Yes, administrator/politician uses words of a billionaire technologist to highlight an issue that needed change. Which would make sense, considering that the interests of the billionaire technologist are affected by the said issue. Not to mention that the billionaire also brings in significant amount of revenue and whose company is a core-contributor to the country's economy (if not the world's).
What's your point?
Don't even bother. The majority of Slashdotters would claim that going to a college is a waste, and would wear their badge of illiteracy with honor, stating that they've learnt everything that there is to learn without setting foot in college. And then they'll tell you how their experience and wonderful geekiness sets them apart from the rest.
And you're right about the need for intelligent people with good academic credentials. I know several companies that are looking for people in EE/ECE related fields with graduate degrees - it is almost impossible to find good candidates, and almost 80% of the folks tend to be Indian or Chinese. I remember a graduate class in Quantum Computing - out of a class of 18, there were all of 2 Americans* in there.
I wonder how many of these people working at Microsoft are Americans? Perhaps, people like this guy should definitely be sent back, rather than let them stay back and use their talents, right?
*Never mind the fact that a lot of people who go to school here eventually identify themselves with an American cultural identity, and call themselves Americans anyway -- what's the point of discrimination then, I wonder?
So, you're basically advocating exploiting them, thinking that they'd do anything to stay in this country.
Rather, let us exploit intelligent, foreign nationals who come here for an education by treating them as second-grade folks compared to American citizens. Nice! What happened to the US that once asked for the tired, hungry and poor masses, I wonder.
I do not know what's sadder, Slashdot responses like yours or idiots who actually believe in the kind of rubbish that you come up with.