I went through this ridiculous process to get my green card. I had been working for my company for 6 years with an H1-B visa. I am a smart guy, I get along with everyone in the group, I know the system we work on in and out. I haven't seen the adds they ran, but I wouldn't be surprised if they looked like what's described in that video. Why would the company be interested in firing me and hiring someone else that comes with huge uncertainties and with months of training to get up to speed?
It gets even more ridiculous than what's in that video. Over the years, immigration lawyers have learned what requirements they can get away with listing in the add. For instance, I have a M.S. degree, but they couldn't list it as a requirement because I am not a manager. Of course there is no connection between being a manager and having a M.S. degree, but I guess this makes sense if you posses a lawyer's brain.
There are two things that don't match your story, though:
(1) My salary is not low by any standards.
(2) The company has hired people that responded to these "fake adds", because the scarcity of good candidates is real. They just had to come up with some excuse why the candidate wasn't qualified for that specific job, and then offer him a different job.
It's all a strange dance, where the government knows and understands what the company is trying to do and why, but the government has to keep the appearance of being protecting the U.S. workers. The solution is to stop requiring these ridiculous adds.
Perhaps you can read the whole chapter, and you'll see that the sentence is uttered by a king in a story that Jesus was telling. It still seems like the king is being portrayed positively by Jesus, so the message remains contradictory, but you shouldn't remove the context so blatantly.
HFT is somewhat illegal, since it could be considered insider trading, since you have time to process information before it becomes available to other people thanks to a faster network infrastructure.
You probably would also complain if you were playing soccer against people that run faster than you. It's not fair!
There is no insider trading If everyone in the market has access to the same information. You'll try to process it as quickly as possible and do something as smart as possible with it. If you are not fast enough or smart enough, you don't need to be in this business. Trading is not an amateur activity.
> The observation that Obama 'will have a 50 cal in the head soon' and a call to 'shoot the [racist slur]' weren't violations of the law [...] That sentence alone implies that in the U.S. death threats are protected free speech, but you can't use the word "nigger". I love it.
An interesting note is that the article doesn't state if any of the 34-person panel of chess-playing programmers contributed code to any of the allegedly plagiarized codes. There may be a conflict of interest here.
Yes, at least Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was a member of the panel. I have a lot of respect Dr. Hyatt and I am not suggesting that the panel's conclusions are wrong: I am just providing the data you were requesting.
Stoned is a classic and a pleasure to disassemble. It fits in a boot sector (512 bytes) and it's not particularly malicious, but it has all the elements that a virus needs. I don't know if it would still work on a modern computer, though: Some old viruses used funky instructions that became obsolete (like "POP CS"), and this one seems to have issues working on large-capacity disks.
Yes, you're absolutely right. I was translating for occidental type people, and trying to avoid the dumb jokes some people on this website come out with.
Rugs are occidental, people like movies, are Western.
Wait, now we are also getting touchy about what oriental-type people call us?
To set up Evolution, I had to judiciously use the Tab key to move the highlight to the "Okay" button, which was not visible because the dialogs were too tall; it worked but it was a huge pain, and not everyone would know you can even do that.
Most window managers will let you move a window around if you press Alt and then click anywhere in the window. That's really handy for these situations.
The way I see Conway's argument, it is an indication that we probably do not have free will. The statement in the title is equivalent to "If electrons don't have free will, neither do we."
At work we use primarily two languages: C++ and Perl. Most programs we write have a Perl wrapper that takes care of parsing options, reading configuration files and that kind of thing. Then it creates a text file with key-value pairs and invokes the C++ program, which reads that file for all its parameter settings.
The use of Perl allows for lots of flexibility for configuration, handling of special cases and plain-old hacks. The C++ does the bulk of the work, and here we care more about good interfaces, efficiency and other quality considerations.
I don't particularly care about which specific pair of languages we use, but having this combination of a main programming language (C++) plus a flexible glue language (Perl) is invaluable. At some point in the past more languages were used (C, Tcl, shell scripts), but in a company were about 100 people may have to read each other's code, it's easier if you keep it down so you "only" have to learn 2 languages to join the team.
Why are you upset about the difficult H-1B to immigrant policy? H-1B is not an immigration visa nor is it a path to citizenship. There are other programs for that.
Would you care to elaborate on that? I am not aware of any other paths to permanent residency or citizenship that are not based on family bonds.
Everything in that video is true, but you are not interpreting it correctly. The real problem is that this bizarre process is the only way to get permanent residence for a skilled worker, other than marrying an American.
After working for my employer for 5 years on an H-1B visa, they started processing my green card. They know I am qualified, I have experience in this position, I get along with my coworkers and I am familiar with some of their trade secrets. Of course, at this point they are not interested in hiring anyone else, American or otherwise, for my position.
The law ends up having the effect that my company now needs to hire lawyers to go through this ridiculous process. This doesn't prove that they don't have legitimate reasons to want to keep me around. If they find a good candidate in the process, they will probably try to hire him for another position. They would still have to come up with a reason why he is not a good replacement for my position specifically (my company was hiring programmers at the time).
You probably don't fully appreciate how absurd this game can get. The lawyers try to post a list of requirements that is very specific, but not too specific because otherwise the Department of Labor may reject the application. Over the years, the lawyers get a sense for what they can ask for. For instance, I have a masters, but they couldn't require this in the ads because I don't have managerial responsibilities (you need to use lawyer logic to understand what I just said).
If the result of all this is not the desired one, my company loses a worker that will be very hard to replace and I get to sell my house, break up with my American fiancee and move back to Europe. Well, that or I could marry in a hurry just to get the green card; but you probably wouldn't approve of that either. I guess the "upside" is that some mediocre American programmer would have an improved chance of being hired by my company because good programmers just got a little harder to find.
The report says that 13.4% of the applications show fraud, and I don't know what to make of the 7.3% with "technical violations" (Did they spell their name inconsistently? Did they not hand in some documentation in time?). In any case, most of us are legit. I can see why you would have issues with the fraudsters, not with all of us.
H1B has turned into a huge scam for corporate slavery. Employers know they can get cheap labor and throw them away when done.
That's a big stinking lie because H-1b visas have been portable for several years now; H-1b employees can simply change jobs. When you have an H-1B you can't "simply" change jobs. You have to find another company that is willing to sponsor you. Besides, if you decide to leave your current job, you have one month to find another employer that sponsors you or you have to leave the country.
It's 10^170, not 10^60
on
Cracking Go
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The article says *chess* has about 10^60 positions. Go actually has 10^170. Now all the people that have made silly arguments about how 10^60 means the game is untreatable should apologize, I suppose.
Oh, and go will fall too. My bet is 20 years before a computer beats the best human players. We know more about how to write a go program than most people think.
int main(){
do {
std::cout move_that_provides_the_most_possible_ways_of_winni ng() std::endl;
} while(!check_mate()); }
master_chess_program.cpp: In function 'int main()': master_chess_program.cpp:5: error: 'move_that_provides_the_most_possible_ways_of_winn ing' was not declared in this scope master_chess_program.cpp:6: error: 'check_mate' was not declared in this scope
No, you are definitely no expert. The name of an array can be used to get a pointer to the first element, and that's how scanf expects you to specify a string.
The XMLHttpRequest certainly does execute on the server and allows a range of parser attacks that you were less likely to get with other technologies. Which would you rather validate, a set of CGI parameters or a blob of XML? The XMLHttpRequest looks to the server just like any other HTTP request, with parameters passed the exact same way as you would pass them to a CGI program. The only side that needs to parse a bunch of XML is the client, which is not much of a security problem.
Make three copies. Store two of them in anti-fire cabinets in separate buildings. Store the third one in an undisclosed location, to make sabotage difficult.
I think the article is great. And this principle can also be applied to Math. Theorems are much like library function calls. You can use them in your own proofs, without caring about how they are proved, because someone has already taken care of that for you. You prove that the hypothesis are true, and you get a result which is guaranteed to be true.
The problem is that in real Math, you often need a slightly different result, or you cannot prove that the hypothesis are true in your situation. The solution often involves understanding what's "under the hood" in the theorem, so that you can modify the proof a little bit and use it.
Every professional mathematician knows how to prove the theorems that he/she uses. There is no such thing as a "high-level mathematician", that doesn't really know the basics, but only uses sophisticated theorems in top of each other. The same should be true in programming, and this is what the article is about.
The solution? Good education. If anyone wants to be considered a professional programmer, he/she should have a basic understanding of digital electronics, micro-processor design, assembly language (at least one), OS architechture, C, some object oriented language, databases... and should be able to understand the relationship between all those things, because when things go wrong, you may have to go to any of the levels.
It's a lot of things to learn, but there is no other way out. Building software is a difficult task and whoever sells you something else lies.
A sphere in one dimension is the two points the same distance away from the sphere's center in either direction.
A sphere in two dimensions is a circle (just the curve around the outside - not the middle area)
That's not right. A 1-sphere is a circle. A 2-sphere is a hollow ball. We measure the dimensionality of the sphere itself, not the space in which it is embedded, because in topology you can define a sphere without a space in which to embed it. For instance, you can define a n-sphere to be the compactification of R^n by adding a single point at infinity.
Re:How would the world react. . .
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
The rest of the world would have a very hard time trying to help you, because the United States have too many weapons.
I spend a lot of time waiting for my computer to finish some task. The lesser I wait, the more work I can get done. The programs that I spend most time waiting for are: - Compilers. - 3D renderers. - Chess programs.
Actually, I write the 3D renderers and chess programs that I just mentioned. So the cycles "modify-the-renderer, compile, render, aggh-it-still-looks-ugly" and "modify-the-evaluation-function, compile, render, aggh-it-still-does-not-select-the-right-move" can be made much shorter with a powerful CPU.
Slashdot Mirror
I went through this ridiculous process to get my green card. I had been working for my company for 6 years with an H1-B visa. I am a smart guy, I get along with everyone in the group, I know the system we work on in and out. I haven't seen the adds they ran, but I wouldn't be surprised if they looked like what's described in that video. Why would the company be interested in firing me and hiring someone else that comes with huge uncertainties and with months of training to get up to speed?
It gets even more ridiculous than what's in that video. Over the years, immigration lawyers have learned what requirements they can get away with listing in the add. For instance, I have a M.S. degree, but they couldn't list it as a requirement because I am not a manager. Of course there is no connection between being a manager and having a M.S. degree, but I guess this makes sense if you posses a lawyer's brain.
There are two things that don't match your story, though:
(1) My salary is not low by any standards.
(2) The company has hired people that responded to these "fake adds", because the scarcity of good candidates is real. They just had to come up with some excuse why the candidate wasn't qualified for that specific job, and then offer him a different job.
It's all a strange dance, where the government knows and understands what the company is trying to do and why, but the government has to keep the appearance of being protecting the U.S. workers. The solution is to stop requiring these ridiculous adds.
Perhaps you can read the whole chapter, and you'll see that the sentence is uttered by a king in a story that Jesus was telling. It still seems like the king is being portrayed positively by Jesus, so the message remains contradictory, but you shouldn't remove the context so blatantly.
HFT is somewhat illegal, since it could be considered insider trading, since you have time to process information before it becomes available to other people thanks to a faster network infrastructure.
You probably would also complain if you were playing soccer against people that run faster than you. It's not fair!
There is no insider trading If everyone in the market has access to the same information. You'll try to process it as quickly as possible and do something as smart as possible with it. If you are not fast enough or smart enough, you don't need to be in this business. Trading is not an amateur activity.
> The observation that Obama 'will have a 50 cal in the head soon' and a call to 'shoot the [racist slur]' weren't violations of the law [...]
That sentence alone implies that in the U.S. death threats are protected free speech, but you can't use the word "nigger". I love it.
An interesting note is that the article doesn't state if any of the 34-person panel of chess-playing programmers contributed code to any of the allegedly plagiarized codes. There may be a conflict of interest here.
Yes, at least Bob Hyatt (author of Crafty) was a member of the panel. I have a lot of respect Dr. Hyatt and I am not suggesting that the panel's conclusions are wrong: I am just providing the data you were requesting.
That would be for a very large Brazil nut... The number is 12,000 picocuries per kg.
Stoned is a classic and a pleasure to disassemble. It fits in a boot sector (512 bytes) and it's not particularly malicious, but it has all the elements that a virus needs. I don't know if it would still work on a modern computer, though: Some old viruses used funky instructions that became obsolete (like "POP CS"), and this one seems to have issues working on large-capacity disks.
Yes, you're absolutely right. I was translating for occidental type people, and trying to avoid the dumb jokes some people on this website come out with.
Rugs are occidental, people like movies, are Western.
Wait, now we are also getting touchy about what oriental-type people call us?
To set up Evolution, I had to judiciously use the Tab key to move the highlight to the "Okay" button, which was not visible because the dialogs were too tall; it worked but it was a huge pain, and not everyone would know you can even do that.
Most window managers will let you move a window around if you press Alt and then click anywhere in the window. That's really handy for these situations.
The way I see Conway's argument, it is an indication that we probably do not have free will. The statement in the title is equivalent to "If electrons don't have free will, neither do we."
At work we use primarily two languages: C++ and Perl. Most programs we write have a Perl wrapper that takes care of parsing options, reading configuration files and that kind of thing. Then it creates a text file with key-value pairs and invokes the C++ program, which reads that file for all its parameter settings.
The use of Perl allows for lots of flexibility for configuration, handling of special cases and plain-old hacks. The C++ does the bulk of the work, and here we care more about good interfaces, efficiency and other quality considerations.
I don't particularly care about which specific pair of languages we use, but having this combination of a main programming language (C++) plus a flexible glue language (Perl) is invaluable. At some point in the past more languages were used (C, Tcl, shell scripts), but in a company were about 100 people may have to read each other's code, it's easier if you keep it down so you "only" have to learn 2 languages to join the team.
Why are you upset about the difficult H-1B to immigrant policy? H-1B is not an immigration visa nor is it a path to citizenship. There are other programs for that.
Would you care to elaborate on that? I am not aware of any other paths to permanent residency or citizenship that are not based on family bonds.
Everything in that video is true, but you are not interpreting it correctly. The real problem is that this bizarre process is the only way to get permanent residence for a skilled worker, other than marrying an American.
After working for my employer for 5 years on an H-1B visa, they started processing my green card. They know I am qualified, I have experience in this position, I get along with my coworkers and I am familiar with some of their trade secrets. Of course, at this point they are not interested in hiring anyone else, American or otherwise, for my position.
The law ends up having the effect that my company now needs to hire lawyers to go through this ridiculous process. This doesn't prove that they don't have legitimate reasons to want to keep me around. If they find a good candidate in the process, they will probably try to hire him for another position. They would still have to come up with a reason why he is not a good replacement for my position specifically (my company was hiring programmers at the time).
You probably don't fully appreciate how absurd this game can get. The lawyers try to post a list of requirements that is very specific, but not too specific because otherwise the Department of Labor may reject the application. Over the years, the lawyers get a sense for what they can ask for. For instance, I have a masters, but they couldn't require this in the ads because I don't have managerial responsibilities (you need to use lawyer logic to understand what I just said).
If the result of all this is not the desired one, my company loses a worker that will be very hard to replace and I get to sell my house, break up with my American fiancee and move back to Europe. Well, that or I could marry in a hurry just to get the green card; but you probably wouldn't approve of that either. I guess the "upside" is that some mediocre American programmer would have an improved chance of being hired by my company because good programmers just got a little harder to find.
The report says that 13.4% of the applications show fraud, and I don't know what to make of the 7.3% with "technical violations" (Did they spell their name inconsistently? Did they not hand in some documentation in time?). In any case, most of us are legit. I can see why you would have issues with the fraudsters, not with all of us.
For more on why Columbus thought he could make the trip, take a look here.
Why is this rated "funny"? The novel and the movie were developed at the same time and the novel was published *after* the movie was released.
The article says *chess* has about 10^60 positions. Go actually has 10^170. Now all the people that have made silly arguments about how 10^60 means the game is untreatable should apologize, I suppose. Oh, and go will fall too. My bet is 20 years before a computer beats the best human players. We know more about how to write a go program than most people think.
I tried what you just said:
i ng() std::endl;
n ing' was not declared in this scope
#include
int main(){
do {
std::cout move_that_provides_the_most_possible_ways_of_winn
} while(!check_mate());
}
master_chess_program.cpp: In function 'int main()':
master_chess_program.cpp:5: error: 'move_that_provides_the_most_possible_ways_of_win
master_chess_program.cpp:6: error: 'check_mate' was not declared in this scope
Maybe I am missing some header files?
No, you are definitely no expert. The name of an array can be used to get a pointer to the first element, and that's how scanf expects you to specify a string.
Make three copies. Store two of them in anti-fire cabinets in separate buildings. Store the third one in an undisclosed location, to make sabotage difficult.
This has been used in Michelin for a long time.
I think the article is great. And this principle can also be applied to Math. Theorems are much like library function calls. You can use them in your own proofs, without caring about how they are proved, because someone has already taken care of that for you. You prove that the hypothesis are true, and you get a result which is guaranteed to be true.
The problem is that in real Math, you often need a slightly different result, or you cannot prove that the hypothesis are true in your situation. The solution often involves understanding what's "under the hood" in the theorem, so that you can modify the proof a little bit and use it.
Every professional mathematician knows how to prove the theorems that he/she uses. There is no such thing as a "high-level mathematician", that doesn't really know the basics, but only uses sophisticated theorems in top of each other. The same should be true in programming, and this is what the article is about.
The solution? Good education. If anyone wants to be considered a professional programmer, he/she should have a basic understanding of digital electronics, micro-processor design, assembly language (at least one), OS architechture, C, some object oriented language, databases... and should be able to understand the relationship between all those things, because when things go wrong, you may have to go to any of the levels.
It's a lot of things to learn, but there is no other way out. Building software is a difficult task and whoever sells you something else lies.
The rest of the world would have a very hard time trying to help you, because the United States have too many weapons.
I spend a lot of time waiting for my computer to finish some task. The lesser I wait, the more work I can get done. The programs that I spend most time waiting for are:
- Compilers.
- 3D renderers.
- Chess programs.
Actually, I write the 3D renderers and chess programs that I just mentioned. So the cycles "modify-the-renderer, compile, render, aggh-it-still-looks-ugly" and "modify-the-evaluation-function, compile, render, aggh-it-still-does-not-select-the-right-move" can be made much shorter with a powerful CPU.