Actually, for web browsing, latency is the big issue. You receive one file, which instructs you to download 10 other files. 3 of those instruct you to download another 23 files, and 4 of those instruct you to grab another 8. That's 4 layers of two way latency just to get the page to render. If your latency is 500ms, that's 2 second page load times alone. The time to actually send the text meanwhile was very low.
And that's for a relatively simple web page.
Long story short - web makes way too many seperate round trips that are dependent on each other for bandwidth to be the concern - latency is everything.
Except that the article actually covers this. Companies that hire H1B workers create more jobs for Americans on average than companies that don't. So, apparently it's true.
Just because you have more money to spend does not mean you hire more people, duh dummy, that is called profit and investors demand it rises every year.
Yes - and how do you think that you make profit rise each year? Hint: the answer is to do more work, and to do more work, you need more people.
Scenario a - company fails to hire an american worker that suits the role. Company doesn't make much money because they don't get a product on shelves. Company fails to grow. Net outcome - one American job that isn't filled.
Scenario b - company hires an H1B worker that suits the role. Company produces product and gets it on the shelves. Company makes money. Company decides that they'd like to grow, and that to do that they need to produce more products. Company hires team of Americans to design and build that product. Net outcome - one H1B job, multiple American jobs.
Of the two outcomes, it's obvious which one is preferable in terms of the number of Americans who are employed.
They bring skills that couldn't be aquired by hiring an American into the company and cause that company to be more productive, allowing them to make more money, and hire more Americans for other roles.
Claiming that hiring foreign workers doesn't take jobs away from American workers is bizzaro logic at its best.
Not true at all. If hiring an H1B causes that company to be more successful, and have more jobs to offer, and *also* hire on average more than one american, then they don't take american jobs away at all. As this study indicates, on average, the above is happening - companies that hire H1B workers on average hire americans at a higher rate than companies not hiring H1B workers.
If you think that employers are doing this because an H1B worker is cheap, you're very badly deluding yourself. Lets take a look at a case study I know well (myself). To hire a US worker to do my job (assuming one existed, which the lack of our ability to hire a second me suggests they don't just now) it would have cost them approximately $140k a year, plus some sign on bonus in the region of $100k of stock and $10k cash. They might have had to pay around $10k in moving expenses if they'd lived on the other side of the country. On the other hand, to hire me, it cost them in the ballpark of $170k a year (because I used the fact that my wife would not be able to work as leverage to get a higher salary, plus they have to pay over the prevailing wage anyway), closer to $150k of stock on sign on, and in the ballpark of $20k in cash (because I used the enormous risk of moving to another continent to justify that my sign on bonus should be larger). It cost them in the ballpark of $30k to ship my stuff across the Atlantic. It cost them $15k in plane tickets *just* to interview me (typically an 8 hour or longer flight results in it being business class), and a further $30k to bring be over for initial training before my H1B began, and then to fly both my wife and me out here. It cost them thousands in paying for accommodation and a relocation agent to get my started finding somewhere to live because I couldn't do that from the other side of the Atlantic, and because I needed assistance getting started with credit due to having no US history. It cost them thousands just to get the visa in the first place, and it costs them thousands to work towards getting me a green card.
Long story short. Over 2 years (a typical length of stay at a tech company in the bay area) I cost my company substantially more than a US citizen, due to the extremely high up front costs, and the slightly higher rolling costs to them.
Frankly, the idea that an H1B worker is "cheap labour" and used to suppress wages and get a cheap way out is so ridiculous it's beyond belief.
They aren't free to withhold their labour without getting kicked out.
So? American citizens aren't free to withhold their labour without dire consequences either. The addition of "we'll move you back to your home country for free" is not really an additional hindenence. If you are unhappy at your job as either an H1B, or a native, you have basically the same recourse - go find a different job.
They aren't free to resign and start their own business without getting kicked out.
Actually, brining a bunch of money and starting businesses is one of the easiest ways of getting to stay in the US. They really like people who do that, with good reason.
They are certainly free to find a new employer who will jump a few hoops to hire them. However the existence of a single hurdle, even if tiny, explicitly means that they are not as free as citizens. And I say this as someone who isn't even a citizen.
You're right, an H1B worker is indeed factually less free than a US citizen. But that far from justifies hyperbole about not being "free to leave for another job".
I mean... I could... sure... But the company I work for is actively looking for more people (either American or non) to do basically the same job as I do (there just aren't enough of us). They can't actually get enough people to do the job. All I would do in leaving is make the company less able to do its thing, and the US economy smaller.
What on earth makes you think an H1B worker "isn't free to leave for a higher paying job"?
As someone in the US on an H1B, I can assure you, changing jobs is trivially easy (once you live in the bay area, and have something like "Google", "Uber" or "Apple" on your CV, everyone wants you). The process of changing jobs on an H1B involves exactly what it would do for a US citizen - go and interview, get the job, move. The only gotcha is that the other company must be willing to sponsor taking over the H1B (which is a tiny cost compared to the wage they'll be paying you).
No, the bug simply shouldn't have been closed at all. "We know that it doesn't work right, here's a bunch of reasons why" simply means that this bug should have a bunch of other blocking bugs. Yes, it may not be fixed for a while, but that doesn't mean that it isn't a bug.
Roundabouts with 1-2 lane roads are much much better for cyclists than 3-4 lane wide roads with gigantic light controlled junctions. You're right, they're not ideal, but you could certainly get a long way in SV by simply dropping the stupid light controlled junctions for something that doesn't spit traffic out in bursts, and in doing so mandate very wide roads.
I'm not aware of a single country (no, not even the most socialist in Europe) in which the social safety net will help you if you quit.
Invariably, the rules for getting unemployment benefits are "you get this if and only if you are made redundant" (not, as opposed to quitting or being fired for misconduct).
As someone from the UK who's recently moved to the US, I can safely say, cyclists in the UK are a lot better (not perfect, but much better) at keeping to the rules. Cyclists in the US really genuinely seem to think that absolutely no rules apply to them at all.
Unfortunately, US road design means that cycling in Silicon Valley is basically a guaranteed death sentence.
It would require major reworking (like replacing the light junctions with roundabouts so that the roads could be made narrower, and dedicated, separate lanes could be added in the space the roads used to use.
If you fail to contain the reaction it very rapidly dissipates. That's in fact the whole problem with this type of reactor design - no one (as of yet) has succeeded in keeping the plasma confined for long enough to generate more power than they put in to start the reaction.
Slashdot Mirror
But where can I see it? Where's the damn link?
This isn't illegal immigration he's talking about - it's legal, hence the visas.
Actually, for web browsing, latency is the big issue. You receive one file, which instructs you to download 10 other files. 3 of those instruct you to download another 23 files, and 4 of those instruct you to grab another 8. That's 4 layers of two way latency just to get the page to render. If your latency is 500ms, that's 2 second page load times alone. The time to actually send the text meanwhile was very low.
And that's for a relatively simple web page.
Long story short - web makes way too many seperate round trips that are dependent on each other for bandwidth to be the concern - latency is everything.
Except that the article actually covers this. Companies that hire H1B workers create more jobs for Americans on average than companies that don't. So, apparently it's true.
Just because you have more money to spend does not mean you hire more people, duh dummy, that is called profit and investors demand it rises every year.
Yes - and how do you think that you make profit rise each year? Hint: the answer is to do more work, and to do more work, you need more people.
This really is very simple.
Scenario a - company fails to hire an american worker that suits the role. Company doesn't make much money because they don't get a product on shelves. Company fails to grow. Net outcome - one American job that isn't filled.
Scenario b - company hires an H1B worker that suits the role. Company produces product and gets it on the shelves. Company makes money. Company decides that they'd like to grow, and that to do that they need to produce more products. Company hires team of Americans to design and build that product. Net outcome - one H1B job, multiple American jobs.
Of the two outcomes, it's obvious which one is preferable in terms of the number of Americans who are employed.
They bring skills that couldn't be aquired by hiring an American into the company and cause that company to be more productive, allowing them to make more money, and hire more Americans for other roles.
Claiming that hiring foreign workers doesn't take jobs away from American workers is bizzaro logic at its best.
Not true at all. If hiring an H1B causes that company to be more successful, and have more jobs to offer, and *also* hire on average more than one american, then they don't take american jobs away at all. As this study indicates, on average, the above is happening - companies that hire H1B workers on average hire americans at a higher rate than companies not hiring H1B workers.
Wait, your assertion is that if anyone is unemployed, then the economy is not growing? That seems like a pretty bizarre assertion.
If you think that employers are doing this because an H1B worker is cheap, you're very badly deluding yourself. Lets take a look at a case study I know well (myself). To hire a US worker to do my job (assuming one existed, which the lack of our ability to hire a second me suggests they don't just now) it would have cost them approximately $140k a year, plus some sign on bonus in the region of $100k of stock and $10k cash. They might have had to pay around $10k in moving expenses if they'd lived on the other side of the country. On the other hand, to hire me, it cost them in the ballpark of $170k a year (because I used the fact that my wife would not be able to work as leverage to get a higher salary, plus they have to pay over the prevailing wage anyway), closer to $150k of stock on sign on, and in the ballpark of $20k in cash (because I used the enormous risk of moving to another continent to justify that my sign on bonus should be larger). It cost them in the ballpark of $30k to ship my stuff across the Atlantic. It cost them $15k in plane tickets *just* to interview me (typically an 8 hour or longer flight results in it being business class), and a further $30k to bring be over for initial training before my H1B began, and then to fly both my wife and me out here. It cost them thousands in paying for accommodation and a relocation agent to get my started finding somewhere to live because I couldn't do that from the other side of the Atlantic, and because I needed assistance getting started with credit due to having no US history. It cost them thousands just to get the visa in the first place, and it costs them thousands to work towards getting me a green card.
Long story short. Over 2 years (a typical length of stay at a tech company in the bay area) I cost my company substantially more than a US citizen, due to the extremely high up front costs, and the slightly higher rolling costs to them.
Frankly, the idea that an H1B worker is "cheap labour" and used to suppress wages and get a cheap way out is so ridiculous it's beyond belief.
They aren't free to withhold their labour without getting kicked out.
So? American citizens aren't free to withhold their labour without dire consequences either. The addition of "we'll move you back to your home country for free" is not really an additional hindenence. If you are unhappy at your job as either an H1B, or a native, you have basically the same recourse - go find a different job.
They aren't free to resign and start their own business without getting kicked out.
Actually, brining a bunch of money and starting businesses is one of the easiest ways of getting to stay in the US. They really like people who do that, with good reason.
They are certainly free to find a new employer who will jump a few hoops to hire them. However the existence of a single hurdle, even if tiny, explicitly means that they are not as free as citizens. And I say this as someone who isn't even a citizen.
You're right, an H1B worker is indeed factually less free than a US citizen. But that far from justifies hyperbole about not being "free to leave for another job".
I mean... I could... sure... But the company I work for is actively looking for more people (either American or non) to do basically the same job as I do (there just aren't enough of us). They can't actually get enough people to do the job. All I would do in leaving is make the company less able to do its thing, and the US economy smaller.
So your assertion is that even though it's trivially easy for me to find a new job, it's impossible for me to find a new job?
Thankfully, this is a trivial task, and does not in any way justify the idea that you are "[not] free to leave for a higher paying job"
What on earth makes you think an H1B worker "isn't free to leave for a higher paying job"?
As someone in the US on an H1B, I can assure you, changing jobs is trivially easy (once you live in the bay area, and have something like "Google", "Uber" or "Apple" on your CV, everyone wants you). The process of changing jobs on an H1B involves exactly what it would do for a US citizen - go and interview, get the job, move. The only gotcha is that the other company must be willing to sponsor taking over the H1B (which is a tiny cost compared to the wage they'll be paying you).
No, the bug simply shouldn't have been closed at all. "We know that it doesn't work right, here's a bunch of reasons why" simply means that this bug should have a bunch of other blocking bugs. Yes, it may not be fixed for a while, but that doesn't mean that it isn't a bug.
It does make me wonder why pedantry doesn't have something to do with your feet/walking though.
Roundabouts with 1-2 lane roads are much much better for cyclists than 3-4 lane wide roads with gigantic light controlled junctions. You're right, they're not ideal, but you could certainly get a long way in SV by simply dropping the stupid light controlled junctions for something that doesn't spit traffic out in bursts, and in doing so mandate very wide roads.
I'm not aware of a single country (no, not even the most socialist in Europe) in which the social safety net will help you if you quit .
Invariably, the rules for getting unemployment benefits are "you get this if and only if you are made redundant" (not, as opposed to quitting or being fired for misconduct).
As someone from the UK who's recently moved to the US, I can safely say, cyclists in the UK are a lot better (not perfect, but much better) at keeping to the rules. Cyclists in the US really genuinely seem to think that absolutely no rules apply to them at all.
Unless you also substantially reduce the number of cars on the road at the same time, which is entirely plausible.
Unfortunately, US road design means that cycling in Silicon Valley is basically a guaranteed death sentence.
It would require major reworking (like replacing the light junctions with roundabouts so that the roads could be made narrower, and dedicated, separate lanes could be added in the space the roads used to use.
It's very expensive. On the other hand, a nearly 4TB SSD that reads at 5.5GB/s is a somewhat exceptional SSD.
Roughly $2.50 per gig.
If you fail to contain the reaction it very rapidly dissipates. That's in fact the whole problem with this type of reactor design - no one (as of yet) has succeeded in keeping the plasma confined for long enough to generate more power than they put in to start the reaction.